Is believing/faith a work ?

Mr. M said:

Many believed after hearing His testimony and seeing
His works, but then never entered into the walk of faith.
Because faith actually means 'to commit to one's trust'.
We are saved by GRACE, through faith, and we are
instructed to GROW in grace and the knowledge of our
Lord and Savior. This is the working out of salvation, unto a mature faith, leading to faithfulness.

Hebrews 13:
20 Now may the God of peace who brought up our Lord Jesus from the dead, that great Shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,
21 Make you complete in every good work to do His will, working in you what is well pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.

Many when they speak of salvation are actually referring to reconciliation.
Romans 5:10 For when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

This is absolutely the work of the Spirit...

Click to expand...

Walk worthy of your calling. Honor God who calls you to his own kingdom and glory.
We thank God continually for this, that when you received the word of God, you received it not as the word of men,
but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually works also in you that believe. 1 Thess 2:12-13

So that you will know what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe,
according to the working of His mighty power which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead
and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places...and gave Him to be head over all things to the church; Eph 1:19-22

For Christ is the head of the church, and is Himself its Savior. Eph 5:23

Brightfame52 said:

No matter how you spin it, if we condition salvation on what we do, to include our believing, it's salvation by works and it forfeits Grace!

Click to expand...

This is not conditioning salvation on what we do. As I said, and Scripture says repeatedly, Jesus died to give us salvation because of who He is, not because of who we are or what we have done. But for us to receive His salvation, we must obey Him. And that obedience comes BEFORE we are regenerated (Rom 6:1-4, Col 2:11-14).

Soyeong said:

(1) The NT is God's word.
(2) The NT speaks against obeying the Mosaic Law.

Deuteronomy 13:4-5 excludes (1) and (2) both from being true, so that leaves three possible options:

(A) (1) is true and (2) is false.
(B) (2) is true and (1) is false.
(C) Both (1) and (2) are false.

So you can believe that the NT is God's word and that it does not speak against obeying the Mosaic Law, or that the NT speaks against obeying the Mosaic Law and that it is not God's word, but it is contradictory for. you to believe both that the NT is God's word and that it speaks against obeying the Mosaic Law. The Mosaic Law is God's word, so if the NT is also God's word, then to interpret it as speaking against obeying the Mosaic Law is to interpret God's word as speaking against God's word, which is contradictory.

My position is (A), so I agree that Paul was not a false prophet and I believe that the NT is God's word while denying that it speaks against obeying the Mosaic Law, so I understand and accept the Jerusalem Decree in Act 15:23-29, but do not interpret it to be speaking against obeying the Mosaic Law for reasons that I have perviously stated.

For example, the four things listed in Acts 15:23-29 are either an exhaustive listed of everything that mature Gentile believer should do or they are not, so the fact that you granted that Gentile believers were obviously taught a number of NT directives means that you are not treating it as being an exhaustive list, which means that you can't also try to use it as an exhaustive list to limit which laws Gentiles should follow. Furthermore, it does not treat it as being an exhaustive list for mature believers, but states that it is a list intended to make things not too difficult for new believers, with the exception in Likewise, in Acts 15:21 that they would continue to learn about how to obey Moses every Sabbath in the synagogue.

Also, the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law (Jeremiah 31:33).

Click to expand...

Acts 15:21 does not command Gentile believers to attend Sabbath services. Acts 15:21 is an observation raised by James before completing the letter to the Gentiles (Acts 15:23-29) - so it was considered but did not find its way into the letter. Christians were persecuted (Acts 9) for years and were probably not welcome in some Synagogues.

You have invested a lot of effort in keeping OT Laws and Traditions. Of course there is no law against that outside of the warnings in Hebrews. However, it is very evident from Acts 21:24-25 in particiular that Paul was not advising Gentile believers to keep Mosaic Law outside the four items listed in Acts 15:29 & Acts 21:25. I really have to look no further as far as the need for keeping Mosaic Law. There are lessons to be learned from the OT and of course it is often quoted in the NT. Be careful not to find yourself being counted among the legalists of Acts 15:24.

Good bye

Brightfame52 said:

You seem to be conditioning salvation on what you do[obeying], thats works my friend, you departed from grace !

Click to expand...

And you are under the delusion that Satan has spread through the Church. Nothing could be further from the truth than the lie that there is no physical action required of man for him to receive salvation (Rom 10:9-10, Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19, and more).

Scripture says clearly that God is responsible 100% for the work that saves Men’s souls. It was His choice, His (Jesus’) death, His love, His timing; all of it was His.

But Scripture is also very clear that the reception of that gift is the responsibility of each individual, through his own faith. And as Eph 2:8-9 says, that faith MUST precede man’s reception of that gift, because faith is the conduit through which the gift is applied to the individual.

Brightfame52 said:

Im saved by the obedience of Christ, not mine Rom 5:19

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

Click to expand...

Absolutely true, but when is that righteousness applied to the many (you)? When they (you) obey! Not before. Never before.

Read the story below. You are the man believing God will save you.

A terrible storm came into a town and local officials sent out an emergency warning that the riverbanks would soon overflow and flood the nearby homes. They ordered everyone in the town to evacuate immediately.

A man heard the warning and decided to stay, saying to himself, “I will trust God and if I am in danger, then God will send a divine miracle to save me.”

The neighbors came by his house and said to him, “We’re leaving and there is room for you in our car, please come with us!” But the man declined. “I have faith that God will save me.”

As the man stood on his porch watching the water rise up the steps, a man in a canoe paddled by and called to him, “Hurry and come into my canoe, the waters are rising quickly!” But the man again said, “No thanks, God will save me.”

The floodwaters rose higher pouring water into his living room and the man had to retreat to the second floor. A police motorboat came by and saw him at the window. “We will come up and rescue you!” they shouted. But the man refused, waving them off saying, “Use your time to save someone else! I have faith that God will save me!”

The flood waters rose higher and higher and the man had to climb up to his rooftop.

A helicopter spotted him and dropped a rope ladder. A rescue officer came down the ladder and pleaded with the man, "Grab my hand and I will pull you up!" But the man STILL refused, folding his arms tightly to his body. “No thank you! God will save me!”

Shortly after, the house broke up and the floodwaters swept the man away and he drowned.

The man stood before God and asked, “I put all of my faith in You. Why didn’t You come and save me?”

And God said, “Son, I sent you a warning. I sent you a car. I sent you a canoe. I sent you a motorboat. I sent you a helicopter. What more were you looking for?”

I heard the warning when I was 13, and I obeyed the Gospel and received salvation. I was baptized in order to receive forgiveness of my sins (Acts 2:38) and have walked in the Light since then (1 John 1:7).

John Mullally said:

Acts 15:21 does not command Gentile believers to attend Sabbath services. Acts 15:21 is an observation raised by James before completing the letter to the Gentiles (Acts 15:23-29) - so it was considered but did not find its way into the letter. Christians were persecuted (Acts 9) for years and were probably not welcome in some Synagogues.

You have invested a lot of effort in keeping OT Laws and Traditions. Of course there is no law against that outside of the warnings in Hebrews. However, it is very evident from Acts 21:24-25 in particiular that Paul was not advising Gentile believers to keep Mosaic Law outside the four items listed in Acts 15:29 & Acts 21:25. I really have to look no further as far as the need for keeping Mosaic Law. There are lessons to be learned from the OT and of course it is often quoted in the NT. Be careful not to find yourself being counted among the legalists of Acts 15:24.

Good bye

Click to expand...

If the NT authors did not speak against obeying the Mosaic Law, then we should still keep the Mosaic Law as part of the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:33), but if they did speak against it, then according to God in Deuteronomy 13:4-5 we should disregard what they said as being the words of false prophets and still keep the Mosaic Law as part of the New Covenant, but either way God did not leave any room for His people to follow someone who spoke against obeying it. The bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man, so we should be quicker to disregard everything that the NT authors said than to disregard anything that God has commanded, though the reality is that they were servants of God who never spoke against obeying Him, so it does not need to come down to that. The NT authors quoted or alluded to the OT thousands of times in order to show that it supported what they were saying and in order to show that they had not departed from it, so they certainly considered it to still be authoritative.

I agree that Acts 15:21 does not command Gentile believers to attend Sabbath serves, though the expectation that Gentiles would continue to learn about how to obey Moses is cited as the justification for starting new believers off with those four things. Legalism has always been a perversion of the Mosaic Law that undermines what God commanded and why he commanded it, which therefore leads to death just as assuredly as refusing to obey it.

Brightfame52 said:

You just making it more and more obvious you laboring under the law/work system for Salvation.

Click to expand...

And you are making it more and more obvious that you are trapped in Satan’s lie.

Let me ask you something, what is faith? Biblically and using only biblical references, what is faith?

Soyeong said:

The bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man, so we should be quicker to disregard everything that the NT authors said than to disregard anything that God has commanded, though the reality is that they were servants of God who never spoke against obeying Him, so it does not need to come down to that.

Click to expand...

Well said. And that is where we divide as I trust that Paul was led by the Lord in Acts 21:24-25 in showing that he did not require Gentile believers to keep the bulk of Mosaic Law. I don't have anything to add to what I said.

Brightfame52 said:

Peter never said salvation is conditioned on something you do, that works. Salvation is by Grace, Peter preached Grace Acts 15:7-11

Click to expand...

As I have shown before, God promised salvation (i.e. forgiveness of sin and receipt of the Holy Spirit) to those who repent and are baptized in Acts 2:38. It is not my problem if you will not acknowledge the obvious.

Brightfame52 said:

7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe

8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;

9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

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?

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

Click to expand...

The grace of the Lord is offered to all as Christ died for all per 1 John 2:2 and 1 Timothy 2:6. It is not automatically received - it is only received by those who believe in Him per John 3:14-15. The Lord desires all men to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4) and has made provision (1 Timothy 2:6). Many are not saved because they do not accept the terms of God's provision - believing in Him.


The grace of the Lord is universal as 1 Timothy 4:10 shows that Christ is the Savior of all men, that is only effective to those who beleive.

John Mullally said:

Well said. And that is where we divide as I trust that Paul was led by the Lord in Acts 21:24-25. I don't have anything to add to what I said.

Click to expand...

So then why are you quicker to disregard 90% of what God has command than to disregard everything that the NT authors said? Why do you trust that Paul was led by the Lord while also interpreting him as saying something that is incompatible with him being led by the Lord? I trust that Paul was led by the Lord in Acts 21:24-25, which is why I do not interpret those verses in a way that is incompatible with him being led by the Lord. The only way that you can consistently maintain your belief that Paul was led by the Lord is if you conclude that you must have completely misinterpreted Acts 21:24-25 or the only way that you can consistently maintain your belief that your interpretation of Acts 21:24-25 is correct is if you conclude that you must have been wrong to think that Paul was led by the Lord, but Deuteronomy 13:4-5 does not leave room for you to maintain both of the beliefs that your interpretation is correct that Paul was led by the Lord.

Soyeong said:

So then why are you quicker to disregard 90% of what God has command than to disregard everything that the NT authors said? Why do you trust that Paul was led by the Lord while also interpreting him as saying something that is incompatible with him being led by the Lord? I trust that Paul was led by the Lord in Acts 21:24-25, which is why I do not interpret those verses in a way that is incompatible with him being led by the Lord. The only way that you can consistently maintain your belief that Paul was led by the Lord is if you conclude that you must have completely misinterpreted Acts 21:24-25 or the only way that you can consistently maintain your belief that your interpretation of Acts 21:24-25 is correct is if you conclude that you must have been wrong to think that Paul was led by the Lord.

Click to expand...

The Mosaic Law was given to Jews. Jesus was Jewish and Gentile believers are following Jesus. So the question is do the Gentile believers need to keep all the Jewish (i.e. Mosaic) Laws that Jesus kept? That question was addressed in Acts 15. Acts 15 was clear to me, but not explicit enough for some like yourself. But wait, Acts 21:24-25 answers the uncertainties as Paul explicitly states that he does not instruct Gentile believers to keep any of the Mosaic Law outside the four things listed in Acts 15:29 and Acts 21:25. So given Acts 21:24-25 there is no excuse for ignorance concerning the Acts 15 decision.

So now YOU, not me, are at an impasse as I accept Paul's assertion in Acts 21:24-25 that Gentile believers are not required to keep the bulk of Mosaic Law. I am not at an impasse because I believe God's revelation is progressive and so I look to Acts and the Epistles as final authority. I am not trying to reconcile the Old Covenant as it has passed away per Hebrews 8.

Significance of the New Covenant: The 11 disciples, who walked with Jesus for 3 years, were not filled with the Holy Spirit until after the resurrection and then 7 weeks later Peter is promising receipt of the Holy Spirit to new believers in Acts 2:38. Why was God so quick to give the Holy Spirit after the Resurrection?

John Mullally said:

The Mosaic Law was given to Jews.

Click to expand...

Indeed, it was given to Jews so that Jew would be equipped to bless the nations by teaching them to obey it in accordance with the promise

John Mullally said:

Jesus was Jewish and Gentile believers are following Jesus. So the question is do the Gentile believers need to keep all the Jewish (i.e. Mosaic) Laws that Jesus kept? That question was addressed in Acts 15. Acts 15 was clear to me, but not explicit enough for some like yourself. But wait, Acts 21:24-25 answers the uncertainties as Paul explicitly states that he does not instruct Gentile believers to keep any of the Mosaic Law outside the four things listed in Acts 15:29 and Acts 21:25. So given Acts 21:24-25 there is no excuse for ignorance concerning the Acts 15 decision.

Click to expand...

Jesus spent his ministry teaching his followers how to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example, so Gentiles can look at what he taught and decided whether or not to follow him, but Gentiles can't follow him by refusing to follow what He taught, so you interpret the Jerusalem Council as essentially ruling that Gentiles shouldn't follow Christ. However, the issue that they were discussing was not whether Gentiles should follow Christ, but whether salvation is the result of circumcision (Acts 15:1) or whether it is by grace (Acts 15:11).

The issue is whether the those four things in Acts 15:19-21 are an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether they are a starting point for new believers and it clearly states that the list is intended to make things not too difficult for new believers with the expectation that they would continue to learn what to do by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogue. Furthermore, the fact that Gentiles are clearly instructed to do more than those four things indicates that it is not an exhaustive list for mature believers.

John Mullally said:

So now YOU, not me, are at an impasse as I accept Paul's assertion in Acts 21:24-25 that Gentile believers are not required to keep the bulk of Mosaic Law. I am not at an impasse because I believe God's revelation is progressive and so I look to Acts and the Epistles as final authority. I am not trying to reconcile the Old Covenant as it has passed away per Hebrews 8.

Click to expand...

God's word does not contradict God's word, so while I agree that God's revelation is progressive, what is revealed at a later time will always be in accordance with what has been previously revealed. Again, in Acts 17:11, the Bereans were praise because they diligently tested everything that Paul said against OT Scripture to see if what he said was correct, so disagreement with the OT is the standard by which we should reject the truth of what is written in the NT. If Paul had been speaking against the Mosaic Law, then the Bereans who rejected what he said would be correctly acting in accordance with what God had instructed them to do in Deuteronomy 13:4-5, so God did not leave His people any room to follow someone who taught against obeying it. The NT authors all treated the OT as still being authoritative by quoting from or alluding to it thousands of times to support what they were saying, yet you treat it as through it has passed away. In Jeremiah 31:33 and Hebrews 8:10, the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law, so it has not passed away.

John Mullally said:

Significance of the New Covenant: The 11 disciples, who walked with Jesus for 3 years, were not filled with the Holy Spirit until after the resurrection and then 7 weeks later Peter is promising receipt of the Holy Spirit to new believers in Acts 2:38. Why was God so quick to give the Holy Spirit after the Resurrection?

Click to expand...

The Spirit also has the role of leading us to obey the Mosaic Law (Ezekiel 36:26-27) and of convicting us of sin (John 16:8), which is in transgression of the Mosaic Law (1 John 3:4). In Romans 8:4-7, those who walk in the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh who refuse to submit to God's law.

Soyeong said:

Jesus spent his ministry teaching his followers how to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example, so Gentiles can look at what he taught and decided whether or not to follow him, but Gentiles can't follow him by refusing to follow what He taught, so you interpret the Jerusalem Council as essentially ruling that Gentiles shouldn't follow Christ. However, the issue that they were discussing was not whether Gentiles should follow Christ, but whether salvation is the result of circumcision (Acts 15:1) or whether it is by grace (Acts 15:11).

Click to expand...

Jesus spoke about the Mosaic Law with Jewish leaders that confronted Him. Those evil hypocrital leaders were largely trying to trick and corner Him into something that could make hay about - largely because they loved their position in society - get it! His instruction to His disciples was to love God supremely and to love one another as yourself. Jesus kept the law - the rest of us did not, so we should listen to Him.

Soyeong said:

The issue is whether the those four things in Acts 15:19-21 are an exhaustive list for mature believers or whether they are a starting point for new believers and it clearly states that the list is intended to make things not too difficult for new believers with the expectation that they would continue to learn what to do by hearing Moses taught every Sabbath in the synagogue. Furthermore, the fact that Gentiles are clearly instructed to do more than those four things indicates that it is not an exhaustive list for mature believers.

Click to expand...

Do you dispute that Paul only instructed Gentile believers to keep the four things in Acts 15:29 per what is said in Acts 21:24-25? There are plenty of directives in the NT, so it is not that Gentile believers were encouraged to lawlessness.

My opinion: The Apostles in Acts 15 could have easily added more requirements, as who would dispute "Thou shalt not steal"? I don't think that obvious moral issues were up for discussion - it was the ceremonial stuff that is not subject to "conscience" that I assume the Apostles wanted to eliminate and so they only listed important non-moral related items.

Soyeong said:

God's word does not contradict God's word, so while I agree that God's revelation is progressive, what is revealed at a later time will always be in accordance with what has been previously revealed. Again, in Acts 17:11, the Bereans were praise because they diligently tested everything that Paul said against OT Scripture to see if what he said was correct, so disagreement with the OT is the standard by which we should reject the truth of what is written in the NT. If Paul had been speaking against the Mosaic Law, then the Bereans who rejected what he said would be correctly acting in accordance with what God had instructed them to do in Deuteronomy 13:4-5, so God did not leave His people any room to follow someone who taught against obeying it. The NT authors all treated the OT as still being authoritative by quoting from or alluding to it thousands of times to support what they were saying, yet you treat it as through it has passed away. In Jeremiah 31:33 and Hebrews 8:10, the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law, so it has not passed away.

Click to expand...

Jesus introduced the New Covenant in the last supper. Hebrews 8:13 (probably written by Paul) indicates that the Old Covenant has passed away. We are not stuck in the Old Covenant that has passed away. Good bye.

Brightfame52 said:

All you doing is showing that you are addicted to salvation by works, the religion of man !

Click to expand...

I attribute what I say directly to scripture (Acts 2:36-41). But you twist scripture by calling faith a work based upon your theology of man - Calvinism.


From the Calvinistic perspective, any religion that teaches that salvation comes about by anything other than an “Irresistible Grace,” necessarily makes salvation into a works-based process, because (as it is reasoned) once you incorporate any act of the human will what is left is some element of human contribution in the process. So, when Calvinists say that “salvation is of the Lord” (Jonah 2:9), what they really mean is that God does everything in salvation, including the act of faith, on behalf of the elect-person, by overcoming their resistance through an irresistible gift of pre-faith regeneration. In other words, Calvinists believe that faith becomes a “work” whenever we come to think of faith as something that we do ourselves, absent of an Irresistible Grace. This means that in Calvinism, faith without Irresistible Grace = works. As such, Calvinists insist that if God had not chosen some—namely Calvinism’s elect—then no one would have freely chosen to love God. Calvinists also deny that God coerces any person to believe or that God believes on behalf of the elect, even though Calvinists admit that they believe that God unilaterally regenerates the unregenerate-elect against their totally depraved will, unsolicited, simply because they happen to be “elect.”.

John Mullally said:

Jesus spoke about the Mosaic Law with Jewish leaders that confronted Him. Those evil hypocrital leaders were largely trying to trick and corner Him into something that could make hay about - largely because they loved their position in society - get it! His instruction to His disciples was to love God supremely and to love one another as yourself. Jesus kept the law - the rest of us did not, so we should listen to Him.

Click to expand...

The greatest two commandments are inclusive of all of the other commandments, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that they are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them. For example, if we love God and our neighbor, then we won't commit adultery, theft, murder, idolatry, kidnapping, rape, favoritism, and so forth, so if you think that Gentiles should obey the greatest two commandment, then you should also think that Gentiles should follow the Mosaic Law.

John Mullally said:

Do you dispute that Paul only instructed Gentile believers to keep the four things in Acts 15:29 per what is said in Acts 21:24-25? There are plenty of directives in the NT, so it is not that Gentile believers were encouraged to lawlessness.

My opinion: The Apostles in Acts 15 could have easily added more requirements, as who would dispute "Thou shalt not steal"? I don't think that obvious moral issues were up for discussion - it was the ceremonial stuff that is not subject to "conscience"

Click to expand...

I agree that Paul instructed Gentiles to keep those four things, so the issue is again whether he thought that they were an exhaustive list such that Gentiles should only keep those four things and nothing else, or whether he thought that they were not an exhaustive list, in which case he was not limiting which laws Gentiles should follow. It is either is exhaustive or it is not, so you can't treat it as being exhaustive to limit which laws Gentiles should follow while also treating as not being an exhaustive list by saying that Gentiles should also follow other laws like the one against stealing.

To suggest that some of God's laws are in regard to moral issues while others are not is suggest that the ones that are not are moral to disobey, however, there is not a single example in the Bible of disobedience to any of God's laws being considered to be moral. Rather, morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws. the Bible never lists which laws are ceremonial and never even refers to that as being a category of law.

John Mullally said:

that I assume the Apostles wanted to eliminate and I so they only listed important non-moral related items.

Click to expand...

The Psalms express an extremely positive attitude towards the Mosaic Law, such as David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying it, so if we consider the Psalms to be Scripture and to therefore express a correct attitude towards it, then we will share it, as Paul did (Romans 7:22), and we will interpret the NT authors as through they had the same attitude towards it. For example, according to Psalms 1:1-2, blessed are those who delight in the Law of the Lord and who meditate on it day and, so it is contradictory to think that the Apostles upheld the truth of these words as Scripture while also thinking that they wanted to eliminate some of God's laws, especially because all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160)

John Mullally said:

Jesus introduced the New Covenant in the last supper. Hebrews 8:13 (probably written by Paul) indicates that the Old Covenant has passed away. We are not stuck in the Old Covenant that has passed away. Good bye.

Hebrews 8:13 In that He says, “ A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.​

Click to expand...

In Hebrew 8:10, the the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law, so while while the Mosaic Covenant has become obsolete, the Mosaic Law did not become obsolete along with it, especially because it is eternal.

Soyeong said:

In Hebrew 8:10, the the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law, so while while the Mosaic Covenant has become obsolete, the Mosaic Law did not become obsolete along with it, especially because it is eternal.

Click to expand...

Hebrews 8:10 says "I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts." Perhaps that is the reason that Paul did not instruct the Gentile believers to keep most of the Mosaic Law in Acts 21:24-25.

Soyeong said:

In Hebrew 8:10, the the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law, so while while the Mosaic Covenant has become obsolete, the Mosaic Law did not become obsolete along with it, especially because it is eternal.

Click to expand...

Can I ask you a simple question? When and where was the Mosaic Law given?