Two Aspects of Salvation (Believers Need to Be Concerned With):

[Bible Highlighter]

In Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from the Mosaic Law, so for you to suggest that Jesus made changes to is to suggest that he sinned and therefore to deny that he is our Savior.

Well, if you actually know your New Testament, everything Jesus said and did was by the commandment of the Father (John 12:49-50) (John 4:34) (John 5:30) (John 6:38). So if there were any changes given while He was teaching, it was by the Father. Jesus was merely relaying what the Father commanded Him to say. Besides, Jesus is the Word made flesh. The Word is God and the Word was with God (John 1:1-2) (John 1:14) (1 Timothy 4:16). There are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one (1 John 5:7). Jesus is one with the Father. Jesus is God. Jesus received worship from men. Only God can receive worship.

The Old Way says:
"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth"
(Matthew 5:38 cf. Exodus 21:23-25).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
"But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matthew 5:39).

When Jesus directly quoted from Scripture in Matthew 4, he proceeded it b y saying "it is written...", but when he was quoting from what the people had heard being taught about Scripture, he proceeded by saying "you have heard that it was said...", so his emphasis on the different form of communication is important. He was not sinning in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2 by making changes to the law, but rather he was fulfilling it by correcting what was wrongly being taught about it and by teaching how to correctly obey it as it was originally intended.

"An eye for an eye" is still a good guideline for judges to help ensure fair sentencing that does not escalate out of proportion to the offense, however, it was a guideline that was only intended to be used by judges and was not intended to be used to justify taking vengeance into our own hands in personal situations. Rather, in those situations, we are instructed not to repay in kind (Proverbs 20:22, 24:29).

Please go back and re-read what Jesus said in this passage In the King James Bible. You either do not understand what Jesus said, or you simply do not believe His words here. Jesus mentioned the Law of an eye for an eye, and then Jesus says, BUT I SAY UNTO YOU…. RESIST NOT EVIL. This is a change and not a clarification. If it was a clarification, then Jesus would have explained it in that way.

Let me rephrase this in more simple terms so that you can understand.

You have heard it said, put out fire with water.
But I say unto you put out fire by with a fire extinguisher.

This is a change.

Here is an example of clarification of misuse.

You have heard it said, put out fire with water.
But I say unto not only to put out fire with water, but also to use a fire extinguisher.

So the words of Jesus do not support your conclusion.
He would have to say something like that in order to fit your narrative.
I understand, you think it is a sin for God to change His own laws. But that is only your imagination and not what the Bible teaches.
Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed. You have to deal with that verse seeing it is inspired Scripture by God.

The rest of what you said falls into tedious back And forth arguments of striving over matters of the Law (of which we are not supposed to do according to Scripture). I have already demonstrated plenty of examples where Jesus changes the Law as per His Father’s instructions. In other words, it was God the Father who changed the Laws, and Jesus was merely relaying to others what the Father commanded Him. Your failer to accept Hebrews 7:12 as written is also noteworthy, as well.

 

[Soyeong]

God’s laws are important but you are looking in the wrong place to get them. Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed. So thats something in the Bible you have to deal with, whether be today or before our Lord at the Judgment.

Again, God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), therefore any instructions that God has ever given for how to testify about His righteousness are eternally valid (Psalms 119:160), 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 murder or sinful to help the poor, but rather the context is speaking about a change in the priesthood, which would also require a change of the law in regard to its administration. If the way to testify about God's nature were to change, then God's nature would not be eternal, but God's nature is eternal, therefore the way to testify about His nature is also eternal. The Law of Moses teaches us how to testify about the nature of the God of Israel while someone who is following a different set a laws is testifying about the nature of a god other than the God of Israel. In other words, if someone is following a god who commanded to commit murder or to refrain from helping the poor, then their god does not have the same identify as the God of Israel, and the same is true of other changes.

Well, if you actually know your New Testament, everything Jesus said and did was by the commandment of the Father (John 12:49-50) (John 4:34) (John 5:30) (John 6:38). So if there were any changes given while He was teaching, it was by the Father. Jesus was merely relaying what the Father commanded Him to say. Besides, Jesus is the Word made flesh. The Word is God and the Word was with God (John 1:1-2) (John 1:14) (1 Timothy 4:16). There are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one (1 John 5:7). Jesus is one with the Father. Jesus is God. Jesus received worship from men. Only God can receive worship.

Jesus was born under the law (Galatians 4:4), so he was obligated to obey it, and he was sinless, so he never broke it, which includes never breaking Deuteronomy 4:2, so he did not make any changes to God's law. In Deuteronomy 13:1-5, God did not leave Himself any room to make changes to His law, but rather if Jesus had done as you suggest, then those who reject him as a false prophet would be correctly doing what God has instructed His people to do. The Father should not be interpreted as being in disagreement with His own commands. He did not make any mistakes when He gave them, so he had no need to make changes to them. Again, all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160).

Please go back and re-read what Jesus said in this passage In the King James Bible. You either do not understand what Jesus said, or you simply do not believe His words here. Jesus mentioned the Law of an eye for an eye, and then Jesus says, BUT I SAY UNTO YOU…. RESIST NOT EVIL. This is a change and not a clarification. If it was a clarification, then Jesus would have explained it in that way.

That is correcting what how people were incorrectly using an eye for an eye to justify taking vengeance into their own hands, not making a change. He was not saying that God commanded this, but I tell you to do something else, but rather that would have been straight teaching rebellion against God.

Let me rephrase this in more simple terms so that you can understand.

You have heard it said, put out fire with water.
But I say unto you put out fire by with a fire extinguisher.

This is a change.

Indeed, that would be a change, which is unlike what Jesus was saying, but rather everything that he said after 'but I say unto you..." was in accordance with OT Scripture.

Here is an example of clarification of misuse.

You have heard it said, put out fire with water.
But I say unto not only to put out fire with water, but also to use a fire extinguisher.

That would not be a clarification of a misuse, but rather that would be making an addition. A clarification would be speaking about the different ways that we can use water to put out a fire. An example of a misuse would be someone citing "put out a fire water" to justify that they are permitted to set the property of others on fire as long as they put it out with water. The parallel would be Jesus quoting that person citing that command in order to make the correction that we are not permitted to set the property of others on fire.

So the words of Jesus do not support your conclusion.
He would have to say something like that in order to fit your narrative.
I understand, you think it is a sin for God to change His own laws. But that is only your imagination and not what the Bible teaches.

The words of Jesus refer to what the people had heard being said, not to what was written, and Matthew 4-5 are very consistent on this distinction. Jesus being born under the Mosaic Law limits what he had the freedom to do. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, so regardless of whether God has the freedom to change His own nature, He does not choose to do that.

Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed. You have to deal with that verse seeing it is inspired Scripture by God.

I have deal with Hebrews 7:12, but you need to deal with the rather problematic implications of your interpretation of Hebrews 7:12 being correct and explain how it does not contradict many other verses like Psalms 119:160. It should not make sense to you to interpret parts of God's word as speaking against following other parts of God's word and you think that the book of Hebrews is promoting rebellion against what God has commanded, then you should be quicker to call into question whether it is God's word than to think that it is a good idea to promote rebellion against God.

The rest of what you said falls into tedious back And forth arguments of striving over matters of the Law (of which we are not supposed to do according to Scripture). I have already demonstrated plenty of examples where Jesus changes the Law as per His Father’s instructions. In other words, it was God the Father who changed the Laws, and Jesus was merely relaying to others what the Father commanded Him. Your failer to accept Hebrews 7:12 as written is also noteworthy, as well.

I explained how what you said is in accordance with the OT and why you are incorrect to think that your examples are speaking about making changes. In Titus 3:1-8, Paul exhorted them to do good works in obedience to what God has commanded, so someone who was speak against doing that should not misuse Titus 3:9 as justification for avoiding correction. God instructed His people not to listen to anyone claiming that He made changes to His law, so He did not do that, and even Jesus had done as you suggest, then you should consider him to be a false prophet.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Again, God's righteousness is eternal (Psalms 119:142), therefore any instructions that God has ever given for how to testify about His righteousness are eternally valid (Psalms 119:160), 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 murder or sinful to help the poor, but rather the context is speaking about a change in the priesthood, which would also require a change of the law in regard to its administration. If the way to testify about God's nature were to change, then God's nature would not be eternal, but God's nature is eternal, therefore the way to testify about His nature is also eternal. The Law of Moses teaches us how to testify about the nature of the God of Israel while someone who is following a different set a laws is testifying about the nature of a god other than the God of Israel. In other words, if someone is following a god who commanded to commit murder or to refrain from helping the poor, then their god does not have the same identify as the God of Israel, and the same is true of other changes.


Jesus was born under the law (Galatians 4:4), so he was obligated to obey it, and he was sinless, so he never broke it, which includes never breaking Deuteronomy 4:2, so he did not make any changes to God's law. In Deuteronomy 13:1-5, God did not leave Himself any room to make changes to His law, but rather if Jesus had done as you suggest, then those who reject him as a false prophet would be correctly doing what God has instructed His people to do. The Father should not be interpreted as being in disagreement with His own commands. He did not make any mistakes when He gave them, so he had no need to make changes to them. Again, all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160).


That is correcting what how people were incorrectly using an eye for an eye to justify taking vengeance into their own hands, not making a change. He was not saying that God commanded this, but I tell you to do something else, but rather that would have been straight teaching rebellion against God.


Indeed, that would be a change, which is unlike what Jesus was saying, but rather everything that he said after 'but I say unto you..." was in accordance with OT Scripture.


That would not be a clarification of a misuse, but rather that would be making an addition. A clarification would be speaking about the different ways that we can use water to put out a fire. An example of a misuse would be someone citing "put out a fire water" to justify that they are permitted to set the property of others on fire as long as they put it out with water. The parallel would be Jesus quoting that person citing that command in order to make the correction that we are not permitted to set the property of others on fire.


The words of Jesus refer to what the people had heard being said, not to what was written, and Matthew 4-5 are very consistent on this distinction. Jesus being born under the Mosaic Law limits what he had the freedom to do. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, so regardless of whether God has the freedom to change His own nature, He does not choose to do that.


I have deal with Hebrews 7:12, but you need to deal with the rather problematic implications of your interpretation of Hebrews 7:12 being correct and explain how it does not contradict many other verses like Psalms 119:160. It should not make sense to you to interpret parts of God's word as speaking against following other parts of God's word and you think that the book of Hebrews is promoting rebellion against what God has commanded, then you should be quicker to call into question whether it is God's word than to think that it is a good idea to promote rebellion against God.


I explained how what you said is in accordance with the OT and why you are incorrect to think that your examples are speaking about making changes. In Titus 3:1-8, Paul exhorted them to do good works in obedience to what God has commanded, so someone who was speak against doing that should not misuse Titus 3:9 as justification for avoiding correction. God instructed His people not to listen to anyone claiming that He made changes to His law, so He did not do that, and even Jesus had done as you suggest, then you should consider him to be a false prophet.

I have not the time to go back and forth with you on every little point involving the Old Law.
I also believe you will not hear the matter even if I addressed your points. You are convinced in your own eyes and nothing I say with Scripture truly will matter to you. It’s not a topic that many are ensnared with like say the false teaching of “Once Saved Always Saved.” So there is no real need to address all of your points in fine detail. But the reader should know that your belief in going back to the Old Law (as a whole) is wrong.

Here are a list of verses showing us the Old Law is no more (as a package deal and not the Moral laws):

"When God speaks of a "new" covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear." (Hebrews 8:13) (NLT).​

​

”Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.” (Romans 7:4).​

​

"But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." (Romans 7:6).​

​

"Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;" (Colossians 2:14).​

​

20 "Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,​

21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;​

22 Which all are to perish with the using; ) after the commandments and doctrines of men?​

23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh."​

(Colossians 2:20-23).​

​

“By abolishing in His [own crucified] flesh the enmity [caused by] the Law with its decrees and ordinances [which He annulled]; that He from the two might create in Himself one new man [one new quality of humanity out of the two], so making peace.” (Ephesians 2:15) (AMPC).​

​

"The old [former] rule [commandment; regulation] is now set aside [nullified; abolished], because it was weak and useless [ineffective]." (Hebrews 7:18) (EXB).​

​

9 “Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;​

10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.” (Hebrews 9:9-10).​

​

16 “For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.​

17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.” (Hebrews 9:16-17).​

​

”And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament…” (Hebrews 9:15).​

​

27 “And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;​

28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” (Matthew 26:27-28).​

​

50 “Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.​

51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; “ (Matthew 27:20-51).​

​

8 “Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;​

9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.” (Hebrews 10:8-9).​

​

“And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.” (Acts of the Apostles 15:1).​

​

“But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” (Acts of the Apostles 15:5).​

​

“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 of the Apostles 15:24).​

​

28 "For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;​

29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well." (Acts of the Apostles 15:28-29).​

​

7 "But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:​

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?​

9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.​

10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.​

11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious." (2 Corinthians 3:7-11).​

​

“But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.” (2 Corinthians 3:14).​

The Old Covenant says this about circumcision:

"And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant." (Genesis 17:14).​

Yet, the New Covenant says this about circumcision:

"Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing." (Galatians 5:2).​

The Old Covenant says this about the Sabbath:

32 "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.​

33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.​

34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.​

35 And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.​

36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses." (Numbers 15:32-36).​

Yet, the New Covenant says this about the Sabbath:

"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:" (Colossians 2:16).​

So it appears things have changed.

This makes sense because Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed.

"For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law." (Hebrews 7:12).​

​

“For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” (John 1:17).​

​

Acts 13:39 says you cannot be justified by the Laws of Moses.
Galatians 5:4 says if you seek to be justified by the Law, you have fallen from grace.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

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 murder or sinful to help the poor, but rather the context is speaking about a change in the priesthood, which would also require a change of the law in regard to its administration. If the way to testify about God's nature were to change, then God's nature would not be eternal, but God's nature is eternal, therefore the way to testify about His nature is also eternal. The Law of Moses teaches us how to testify about the nature of the God of Israel while someone who is following a different set a laws is testifying about the nature of a god other than the God of Israel. In other words, if someone is following a god who commanded to commit murder or to refrain from helping the poor, then their god does not have the same identify as the God of Israel, and the same is true of other changes.

No, no. That’s clearly a false interpretation. Hebrews 7:12 talks about how there is a change of the priesthood, there is necessity of a change of the Law, as well. So it cannot be talking about the priesthood and the priesthood. It says there is a change of the Law in addition to a change of the priesthood. Again, I don’t think you are capable of seeing the truth on this matter. What the Bible says here is insignifcant to you. What matters to you is keeping the Old Law despite what the Bible says. This is why this discussion will have absolutely zero effect upon you. Let our readers here simply check out Acts 15 and they will see that the Gentile believers are instructed that they do not have to keep the Laws of Moses. Only certain select laws from out of the Old Law is what they were talking about. So again, a child like reading of Acts 15 refutes your false belief here. But I know this will not convince you. A neon sign of Hebrews 7:12 could crash through through your house and you still wouldn’t get it. Your stuck in the quicksand of the Old Law that is no more as a whole or package deal. I say this not to wound you or belittle you, but I say out of love to seek the Lord in what His Word says alone and not what you want the Bible to say.

 

[Soyeong]

I have not the time to go back and forth with you on every little point involving the Old Law.
I also believe you will not hear the matter even if I addressed your points. You are convinced in your own eyes and nothing I say with Scripture truly will matter to you. It’s not a topic that many are ensnared with like say the false teaching of “Once Saved Always Saved.” So there is no real need to address all of your points in fine detail. But the reader should know that your belief in going back to the Old Law (as a whole) is wrong.

Here are a list of verses showing us the Old Law is no more (as a package deal and not the Moral laws):

"When God speaks of a "new" covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear." (Hebrews 8:13) (NLT).​

​

”Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.” (Romans 7:4).​

​

"But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." (Romans 7:6).​

​

"Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;" (Colossians 2:14).​

​

20 "Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,​

21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;​

22 Which all are to perish with the using; ) after the commandments and doctrines of men?​

23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh."​

(Colossians 2:20-23).​

​

“By abolishing in His [own crucified] flesh the enmity [caused by] the Law with its decrees and ordinances [which He annulled]; that He from the two might create in Himself one new man [one new quality of humanity out of the two], so making peace.” (Ephesians 2:15) (AMPC).​

​

"The old [former] rule [commandment; regulation] is now set aside [nullified; abolished], because it was weak and useless [ineffective]." (Hebrews 7:18) (EXB).​

​

9 “Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;​

10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.” (Hebrews 9:9-10).​

​

16 “For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.​

17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.” (Hebrews 9:16-17).​

​

”And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament…” (Hebrews 9:15).​

​

27 “And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;​

28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” (Matthew 26:27-28).​

​

50 “Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.​

51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; “ (Matthew 27:20-51).​

​

8 “Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;​

9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.” (Hebrews 10:8-9).​

​

“And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.” (Acts of the Apostles 15:1).​

​

“But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” (Acts of the Apostles 15:5).​

​

“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 of the Apostles 15:24).​

​

28 "For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;​

29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well." (Acts of the Apostles 15:28-29).​

​

7 "But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:​

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?​

9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.​

10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.​

11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious." (2 Corinthians 3:7-11).​

​

“But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.” (2 Corinthians 3:14).​

The Old Covenant says this about circumcision:

"And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant." (Genesis 17:14).​

Yet, the New Covenant says this about circumcision:

"Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing." (Galatians 5:2).​

The Old Covenant says this about the Sabbath:

32 "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.​

33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.​

34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.​

35 And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.​

36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses." (Numbers 15:32-36).​

Yet, the New Covenant says this about the Sabbath:

"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:" (Colossians 2:16).​

So it appears things have changed.

This makes sense because Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed.

"For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law." (Hebrews 7:12).​

​

“For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” (John 1:17).​

​

Acts 13:39 says you cannot be justified by the Laws of Moses.
Galatians 5:4 says if you seek to be justified by the Law, you have fallen from grace.

If you want, you can address a specific point rather than addressing everything that I've said. What you say with Scripture matters to me, I just don't think that you've correctly understood the verses that you've quoted. For example, in Colossians 2:20-23, it directly states that that is speaking against the doctrines and commandments of men, yet you've interpreted that passage as speaking against the commandments of God. You should be quicker to think that you must have misunderstood all of the verses that you've quoted than to think that it makes perfect sense to interpret God's word as speaking against obeying God, and the bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man, so even if your interpretation of those verses is correct, then you should be quicker to disregard them than to disregard any of God commands, but either way we should still obey what God has commanded.

No, no. That’s clearly a false interpretation. Hebrews 7:12 talks about how there is a change of the priesthood, there is necessity of a change of the Law, as well. So it cannot be talking about the priesthood and the priesthood. It says there is a change of the Law in addition to a change of the priesthood. Again, I don’t think you are capable of seeing the truth on this matter. What the Bible says here is insignifcant to you. What matters to you is keeping the Old Law despite what the Bible says. This is why this discussion will have absolutely zero effect upon you. Let our readers here simply check out Acts 15 and they will see that the Gentile believers are instructed that they do not have to keep the Laws of Moses. Only certain select laws from out of the Old Law is what they were talking about. So again, a child like reading of Acts 15 refutes your false belief here. But I know this will not convince you. A neon sign of Hebrews 7:12 could crash through through your house and you still wouldn’t get it. Your stuck in the quicksand of the Old Law that is no more as a whole or package deal. I say this not to wound you or belittle you, but I say out of love to seek the Lord in what His Word says alone and not what you want the Bible to say.

I've showed that the change of the law is in regard to a change in its administration rather than its content and you insisting that it is clearly false is not a counterargument. What the Bible says here is significant to me, I just have an abundance of good reasons to think that you've misinterpreted what it says here. The Bible says things like that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160) and to refrain from eating unclean animals (Leviticus 11), so you want to accuse of holding my position despite what the Bible says, but you are the one who is actually guilty of doing that. Perhaps a child like reading of Acts 15 supports your position, but an adult like reading of Acts 15 supports my position. All throughout the Bible, God wanted His people to repent and to return to obedience to His law, and even Jesus began his ministry with that Gospel message, so you should not need me to help you recognize how absurd it is for you to interpret the Bible as speaking against doing that.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If you want, you can address a specific point rather than addressing everything that I've said. What you say with Scripture matters to me, I just don't think that you've correctly understood the verses that you've quoted. For example, in Colossians 2:20-23, it directly states that that is speaking against the doctrines and commandments of men, yet you've interpreted that passage as speaking against the commandments of God. You should be quicker to think that you must have misunderstood all of the verses that you've quoted than to think that it makes perfect sense to interpret God's word as speaking against obeying God, and the bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man, so even if your interpretation of those verses is correct, then you should be quicker to disregard them than to disregard any of God commands, but either way we should still obey what God has commanded.


I've showed that the change of the law is in regard to a change in its administration rather than its content and you insisting that it is clearly false is not a counterargument. What the Bible says here is significant to me, I just have an abundance of good reasons to think that you've misinterpreted what it says here. The Bible says things like that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160) and to refrain from eating unclean animals (Leviticus 11), so you want to accuse of holding my position despite what the Bible says, but you are the one who is actually guilty of doing that. Perhaps a child like reading of Acts 15 supports your position, but an adult like reading of Acts 15 supports my position. All throughout the Bible, God wanted His people to repent and to return to obedience to His law, and even Jesus began his ministry with that Gospel message, so you should not need me to help you recognize how absurd it is for you to interpret the Bible as speaking against doing that.

As I suspected. You are not able to see what I have shown plainly with Scripture. It’s time to move on. All I can do is pray that you will one day see what I have shown here. The plan child like reading of the verses I posted does not support your belief in the slightest. I have explained it, but you are not getting it because you want to keep the Law of Moses and not the New Covenant.

Again, I say this not to wound you, but I say it in love and truth.

 

[Soyeong]

As I suspected. You are not able to see what I have shown plainly with Scripture. It’s time to move on. All I can do is pray that you will one day see what I have shown here. The plan child like reading of the verses I posted does not support your belief in the slightest. I have explained it, but you are not getting it because you want to keep the Law of Moses and not the New Covenant.

Again, I say this not to wound you, but I say it in love and truth.

I've seen the verses that you've posted and I used to interpret them in the same manner, so I've seen why you hold the position that you do, but I've grown to find many major problems with that interpretation that you've ignored, such as the fact that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), which is why I no longer agree that your interpretations are correct. So perhaps a child like reading of them will support your position, but an adult like reading supports mine. In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Law of Moses in our mind and writing it on our hearts. In Matthew 22:36-40, Jesus summarized the Law of Moses as being about how to love God and our neighbor, and in Psalms 119:142, the Mosaic Law is truth, so your posts are actually in opposition to love and truth.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I've seen the verses that you've posted and I used to interpret them in the same manner, so I've seen why you hold the position that you do, but I've grown to find many major problems with that interpretation that you've ignored, such as the fact that all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalms 119:160), which is why I no longer agree that your interpretations are correct. So perhaps a child like reading of them will support your position, but an adult like reading supports mine. In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Law of Moses in our mind and writing it on our hearts. In Matthew 22:36-40, Jesus summarized the Law of Moses as being about how to love God and our neighbor, and in Psalms 119:142, the Mosaic Law is truth, so your posts are actually in opposition to love and truth.

I went from believing water baptism is something we must do, and then to the belief that Spirit baptism replaces water baptism. Yet, I have now reverted back to my previous original position again based on Scripture. All I can do is tell you to ask God the Father to send His Holy Spirit to re-examine your beliefs again under a new light and not to how you want to see things. Be willing to admit you are wrong about your desire to want to keep the Old Law. There is clearly some desire in you that wants to keep the Old law despite the many plain verses that say that the Old Law is no more.

 

[Soyeong]

I went from believing water baptism is something we must do, and then to the belief that Spirit baptism replaces water baptism. Yet, I have now reverted back to my previous original position again based on Scripture. All I can do is tell you to ask God the Father to send His Holy Spirit to re-examine your beliefs again under a new light and not to how you want to see things. Be willing to admit you are wrong about your desire to want to keep the Old Law. There is clearly some desire in you that wants to keep the Old law despite the many plain verses that say that the Old Law is no more.

Indeed, beliefs can change and revert. However, when my position is in favor of obeying what God has commanded in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow and your position is in opposition that, then it is fairly clear which of us is correct. The Spirit has the role of leading us in truth (John 16:13), the Spirt has the role of leading us to obey the Mosaic Law (Ezekiel 36:26-27), and the Mosaic Law is truth (Psalms 119:142), but the Spirit does not have the role of leading us to rebel against the Father's commands. In Psalms 119:160, all of God's righteous laws are eternal.

The Psalms express an extremely positive view of the Mosaic Law, such as with 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 view of the Mosaic Law, then we will share it as Paul did (Romans 7:22). For example, in Psalms 1:1-2, blessed are those who delight in the Law of the Lord and who meditate on it day and night, so we can't believe in the truth of these words as Scripture while not allowing them to shape our view of obeying the Mosaic Law. Moreover, the authors of the NT considered the Psalms to be Scripture, so they should be interpreted as through they were in complete agreement with the view of the Mosaic Law expressed in Scripture. Having anything less than the view that we ought to delight in obeying the Mosaic Law is incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture.

 

[MaxPower]

(The Next Step or Phase in the Salvation Process).

There is no next step or phase. Salvation is not by works.

Its provided through the cross to all men who can freely come and find grace.

Jesus is our Salvation, When someone is born again they receive Christ in them, that isn't a process it happens in an instant the moment one goes to God in faith in Jesus, The new birth is when you receive Jesus, He is the gift of righteousness, the gift of eternal life, Christ in you the hope of Glory

 

[Bible Highlighter]

There is no next step or phase. Salvation is not by works.

This is true in our Initial Salvation when we are first saved by God’s grace (Ephesians 2:8-9) (Titus 3:5) (Romans 4:3-5) (Romans 11:6), but this is not the case in Sanctification, which follows.

How so?

James says,
"Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." (James 2:24).

Paul says,
"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.”
(1 Timothy 5:8).

So if you do not do the good work of providing for your own, you are worse than an unbeliever.
So this cannot be talking about false believers as many in your camp will try to use with other verses like this.
Obviously, a person is not saved if they are worse than an unbeliever and they deny the faith.

Furthermore, Paul says,
"8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not." (Galatians 6:8-9).

Okay, so according to this verse 8, if you sow to the Spirit, you will reap everlasting life. So this is not just doing nothing but believing in Jesus.
Verse 9 defines what this “sowing to the Spirit” actually is. It says In verse 9 that we are not to be weary (tired) in well doing (good works), for we will reap (reap everlasting life) if we faint not. So we have to continue to sow to the Spirit in well doing (or good works) to reap everlasting life (Which is salvation). This is from the apostle Paul himself. He is teaching you need to have good works to be saved here, which of course is only AFTER you are saved by God’s grace through faith without works in your Initial Salvation (Ephesians 2:8-9), etcetera.

But yes, there is a next step of salvation. It’s called Sanctification. Most Christians are either unaware of 2 Thessalonians 2:13, or they fight against what it plainly says.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 says,
"…God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:"

So the secondary aspect of salvation is described here. God chooses you to salvation through Sanctification. Sanctification is to live holy according to the immediate context (See verse 12 for the polar opposite concept of this verse, and also see verses 15-16).

In addition, Paul says,
"For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.” (Romans 8:13).

In other words, if you live one way by living after the flesh (sin), you will die (die spiritually), but if you live another way by mortifying (Putting to death) the deeds of the body (sin) by the power of the Holy Spirit (Sanctification), you will live (live eternally).

Its provided through the cross to all men who can freely come and find grace.

Actually, we are initially saved by believing the gospel message that includes believing that Christ died for our sins, He was buried, and risen the third day for our salvation. So it is more than just believing in the cross to receive God’s grace. In our Initial Salvation, it can also include seeking forgiveness with the Lord Jesus Christ, as well (See: Romans 10:9, and Romans 10:13).

But God’s grace is not a license for immorality or lasciviousness (Jude 1:4).
God’s grace teaches us to deny ungodliness and that we should live righteously and godly in this present world (Titus 2:11-12).
In fact, 2 Thessalonians 2:13 is tied to verse 14. Verse 13 says God calls us to salvation through Sanctification and a belief of the truth, which is a call of the gospel (verse 14). So just as God’s grace teaches us to deny ungodliness, the gospel calls us to Sanctification (i.e., to live holy by the Holy Spirit).

In fact, the reason why Christ gave Himself for the church so that He might sanctify it in making it holy by the Word of God (Scripture).

“…even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish”(Ephesians 5:25-27).

Jesus is our Salvation,

Yes, Jesus is our salvation. But He saves us both by His grace, and in Sanctification.

Philippians 2:12-14
Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."

“I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.”(John 15:5).

When someone is born again they receive Christ in them, that isn't a process

Right, being born again is not a process, but salvation is a process.

“…let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” (2 Corinthians 7:1).

"Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:”(Hebrews 12:14).

it happens in an instant the moment one goes to God in faith in Jesus, The new birth is when you receive Jesus, He is the gift of righteousness, the gift of eternal life, Christ in you the hope of Glory

I believe God can impute righteousness by our belief in the gospel when we are initially saved just as Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. No doubt about it. If you accepted Jesus as your Savior a few minutes before you died, you would be saved by God’s grace 100% without any works. But seeing we have to live out our faith in a continual access to His grace, this involves the work of faith and being faithful. Just read the heroes of faith account in Hebrews 11. We see accounts of faith in action and it was not all accounts of them believing with no action.

You also have to employ 1 John 1:7 for the blood of Jesus to cleanse you from all sin, as well.
In other words, if we walk in the light as he is in the light, the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin.
Walking in the light is conditional. God does not force you to walk in the light.
Walking in the light = Loving your brother according to the indirect wording in 1 John 2:9-11.
So you have to love your brother to have the blood of Jesus cleanse you of all sin, which means it is a part of salvation.
Also, see 1 John 3:10, and 1 John 3:15.

In addition, we have to abide in Christ Jesus to have eternal life. 1 John 5:12 says he that has the Son has life and he that does not have the Son does not have life. How do you know you have Jesus Christ in your life? By finding that you are keeping His commandments (1 John 2:3). This is not the laws of Moses like keeping the Saturday Sabbath, circumcision, dietary laws, holy days, and animal sacrifices. No, no. We are under the commands that come from Jesus and His followers. However, the person who says they know the Lord and they do not keep His commandments, they are a liar and the truth is not in them (1 John 2:4). Meaning, Jesus is not in them because Jesus is the way, the TRUTH, and the life. They are not saved if they are not keeping His commandments. Jesus says if you love me, keep my commandments (John 14:15). Obviously if people do not love Jesus are not saved. So obeying the Lord’s commands is a must. Obeying God is also not forced upon us, either. We have to choose this day each day in whom we will serve.

 

[Buzzard3]

As far as being saved by faith only without “works”, that is true

Really? "faith without works is dead" (James 2:26). So you're saying we're saved by "dead" faith?
(By "works", James is referring to obedience.)

Which part of the following verse suggests we're saved by faith alone?:
"a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24).

1John 2:3-6 says a believer who disobeys God’s commandments doesn't "know" Christ, is a "liar" and "the truth is not in him". Does that sound like a believer who is saved by faith alone? It doesn't to me.

 

[Buzzard3]

We are not under the Law of Moses (See Romans 6).

We are not under all the Law of Moses, but I think the moral laws of Moses remain and apply to Christains. In Romans 13:8-10, Paul indicates that Christians are under the Mosaic law to love your neighbour, which comes from Leviticus 19. Paul then indicates that some of the Ten Commandments and "any other commandment" are included in the law to love your neighbour.


"Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this sentence, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."

 

[Bible Highlighter]

We are not under all the Law of Moses, but I think the moral laws of Moses remain and apply to Christains.

Yes, my signature at the bottom of each of my posts should hopefully clarify that for you. But just in case, I believe that we are to primarily follow the commands that come from Jesus and His apostles, which would involve the moral laws like, do not steal, do not murder, do not covet, etcetera. Disobeying these commands would be sins of commission. There are also sins of omission like: Not preaching the gospel, not helping the poor, not loving God, and not loving your brother and neighbor.

I believe the ceremonial laws like the Saturday Sabbath, circumcision, dietary laws, holy days, animal sacrifices do not apply to Christians (Acts 15, and Acts 13:39).

In Romans 13:8-10, Paul indicates that Christians are under the Mosaic law to love your neighbour, which comes from Leviticus 19. Paul then indicates that some of the Ten Commandments and "any other commandment" are included in the law to love your neighbour.

Yes, this has been repeated into the New Covenant. There are certain laws that have carried over like not partaking in tattoos, and not copying the practices or ways of heathen nations, etcetera.

"Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this sentence, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."

Agreed. I agree that to love your neighbor fulfills the Old Law. But there are other New Testament commands we have to obey, as well. But this can only be after we are first saved by God’s grace without works (Which happens in our Initial Salvation when we are born again spiritually). The Law (Old Law) is good if it is used lawfully (1 Timothy 1:8).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Really? "faith without works is dead" (James 2:26). So you're saying we're saved by "dead" faith?
(By "works", James is referring to obedience.)

Which part of the following verse suggests we're saved by faith alone?:
"a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24).

1John 2:3-6 says a believer who disobeys God’s commandments doesn't "know" Christ, is a "liar" and "the truth is not in him". Does that sound like a believer who is saved by faith alone? It doesn't to me.

I believe James is talking about salvation (i.e. the Secondary Aspect of Salvation) for a believer AFTER they have been initially saved by God’s grace. So I believe that Paul refers to being saved by a belief alone in our Initial Salvation (or the 1st Aspect of our Salvation) (Ephesians 2:8-9). For example, in Romans 4, it says that Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness. This is a belief alone and it points to how we need to be saved INITIALLY (Which is not what James is talking about). Paul is concerned of how to GET saved. James is concerned with how to continue in God’s plan of salvation with our Sanctification to live a holy life by the Spirit (Which involves works, and obeying God’s commands in the New Testament).

#1. 1st aspect of salvation -
God’s grace through faith without works
(Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 4:3-5, Romans 11:6, Titus 3:5.).
(Initial Salvation).

#2. 2nd aspect of salvation -
Sanctification to live a holy life by the Spirit
(2 Thessalonians 2:13, Galatians 6:8-9, Romans 8:13, Hebrews 12:14).
(Secondary Aspect of Salvation).

In other words, I did not need to do a good work in order to GET saved. It was by faith alone in my Initial Salvation. I just believed the gospel message in that Christ died for my sins, he was buried, and risen the third day (1 Corinthians 15:1-4), and I called upon the name of the Lord Jesus and sought forgiveness of my sins with Him (Romans 10:9, Romans 10:13, Luke 18:9-14). These actions on my part are not good works. I was saved ultimately by God’s grace and mercy when I first came to the Lord for salvation.

But after I was saved by God’s grace, I needed to continue in plan of salvation in Sanctification and that does involve doing good works, living holy (Or keeping myself pure), and obeying the Lord Jesus. Some take the view of one wrong extreme or the other. Some make it all about God’s grace, and others make it all about God’s works and no grace ever. I believe it is a healthy balance of both.

Meaning, faith alone (belief alone) is true ONLY in our Initial Salvation. But faith alone is not true when we are living out our faith in the Secondary Aspect of Salvation involving the Sanctification of the Holy Spirit to live a holy life.

But we must not forget, Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness.
This is a parallel of how we GET saved when we are first saved by God’s grace.

 

[bling]

Really? "faith without works is dead" (James 2:26). So you're saying we're saved by "dead" faith?
(By "works", James is referring to obedience.)

Which part of the following verse suggests we're saved by faith alone?:
"a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24).

1John 2:3-6 says a believer who disobeys God’s commandments doesn't "know" Christ, is a "liar" and "the truth is not in him". Does that sound like a believer who is saved by faith alone? It doesn't to me.

We are saved by God alone. I put works in "", so show a specific type of "works" being used by Paul which is "works of the Law", while James is talking about "work" as the result of faith and what God has done already for you. Works do not gain you anything sine everything is given up front (with the excepting of being in heaven with God, we have just a deed for our home in heaven now).
You can see a person's faith by the works they are doing out of a gratitude type of Godly Love.
What do you see yourself "working" to get?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

We are saved by God alone. I put works in "", so show a specific type of "works" being used by Paul which is "works of the Law", while James is talking about "work" as the result of faith and what God has done already for you. Works do not gain you anything sine everything is given up front (with the excepting of being in heaven with God, we have just a deed for our home in heaven now).
You can see a person's faith by the works they are doing out of a gratitude type of Godly Love.
What do you see yourself "working" to get?

So what do you do with verses like 1 Timothy 5:8, Galatians 6:8-9, the Parable of the Talents, and the Parable of the Sheep and Goats in Matthew 25? They sound like works are a part of the salvation equation to me. Granted, we are not saved by works ALONE as Paul says in Ephesians 2:8-9 (Which is a reference to our Initial Salvation).

Salvation is both by God’s grace through faith without works (Initial Salvation), and salvation continues in the Sanctification of the believer to live a holy life by the Spirit (Secondary Aspect of Salvation) which does involve works.

So we need both God’s grace and later God’s works moving through us to be saved.

Titus 1:16 says you can deny God by being reprobate unto every good work. So this proves works are necessary to be saved. You cannot be reprobate unto every good work and be saved. Yes, a person can receive Jesus on their deathbed without doing any works and be saved. But this is a person who does not have an opportunity to live out their faith. We see examples of faith that is lived out in Hebrews 11. You know. By faith, Noah built the Ark, etcetera. That’s a true faith that is lived out. So while faith may start off as a belief alone in our salvation, it does not remain that way.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

We are saved by God alone. I put works in "", so show a specific type of "works" being used by Paul which is "works of the Law", while James is talking about "work" as the result of faith and what God has done already for you. Works do not gain you anything sine everything is given up front (with the excepting of being in heaven with God, we have just a deed for our home in heaven now).
You can see a person's faith by the works they are doing out of a gratitude type of Godly Love.
What do you see yourself "working" to get?

While God does play a major factor in our being saved, it is not all God alone. We do have free will to respond to His salvation or not.

If not, then statements like these in the Bible would simply be a lie.

"…Save yourselves from this untoward generation.” (Acts 2:40).

 

[bling]

So what do you do with verses like 1 Timothy 5:8, Galatians 6:8-9, the Parable of the Talents, and the Parable of the Sheep and Goats in Matthew 25? They sound like works are a part of the salvation equation to me. Granted, we are not saved by works ALONE as Paul says in Ephesians 2:8-9 (Which is a reference to our Initial Salvation).

Salvation is both by God’s grace through faith without works (Initial Salvation), and salvation continues in the Sanctification of the believer to live a holy life by the Spirit (Secondary Aspect of Salvation) which does involve works.

So we need both God’s grace and later God’s works moving through us to be saved.

Titus 1:16 says you can deny God by being reprobate unto every good work. So this proves works are necessary to be saved. You cannot be reprobate unto every good work and be saved. Yes, a person can receive Jesus on their deathbed without doing any works and be saved. But this is a person who does not have an opportunity to live out their faith. We see examples of faith that is lived out in Hebrews 11. You know. By faith, Noah built the Ark, etcetera. That’s a true faith that is lived out. So while faith may start off as a belief alone in our salvation, it does not remain that way.

We can all agree on what we see, but saying you lack "Love" requires an agreed upon definition. God says you did not do these things to the least of these (which they cannot deny or even question), but if God said "you did not have Godly type Love in you, that requires an explanation of this Love (which is seen in their actions or lack of action). If you were stuck in an iron lung your heart can still be filled with Godly type Love wanting to help others and be saved by your faith.
In the parable of the talents (bags of Gold) refers to Godly type Love which a person in an iron lung can show without doing "work".
It all goes back to the truism "he that is forgiven much Loves much" that love can be seen but it is not a work. This Godly type Love comes automatically when you humbly accept God's forgiveness of your huge debt. Using this Love is worship to God and worship is not a work.

 

[bling]

While God does play a major factor in our being saved, it is not all God alone. We do have free will to respond to His salvation or not.

If not, then statements like these in the Bible would simply be a lie.

"…Save yourselves from this untoward generation.” (Acts 2:40).

Humbly accepting undeserved pure charity is not a work. God presents us a charitable gift, but we can refuse the gift.