What is the Historical Gospel of Jesus Christ?

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

So one cannot be saved unless they are first saved by faith in Christ and then they stay saved by doing the things James states?

I can see why a straight answer is avoided because you know this is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Never was. Never will be.


God bless.

Is that what James said????????????????

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

@Yeshua HaDerekh has pointed nothing out except that he, like you, will not answer direct questions.

Yes I have, but you are not interested in learning anything...only arguing. You have ears but do not hear, you have eyes but do not see...nor do you have a desire for truth. Thus I can not speak to you or show you anything further. Shalom

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

@Yeshua HaDerekh also seemed to not understand that the Covenant of Law and the Adamic and Noahic and the Abrahamic Covenants are not all one and the same.

This is why @Yeshua HaDerekh cannot post the Noahide Law from Scripture.

You show your complete dishonesty and lies. You bear false witness. You know full well I DID post some...you asked for only one and I gave you two. Everyone here knows that. You were too lazy to look them up yourself. Again, since you have shown a complete lack of understanding of Torah, don't blame me...

 

[GDL]

@P1LGR1M

I've asked you to please consolidate. With a quick glance through your most recent barrage of posts, I see nothing but unproductive argument - no Scripture to back up your assertions or detail how you derive your meanings for words and phrases important to the conversation.

I did notice this one which I landed on for some reason after restarting my computer:

No, I absolutely do not see "instruction in the NC about keeping God's Commandments, God's 2nd Great Commandment from Torah to be a bringing together of His Decalogue Commandments regarding our thoughts & actions toward one another."

Clear enough?

Yes, clear enough. It shows you don't read much Scripture let alone look at it in much depth. There's nothing I can do about this. I leave you to yourself.

 

[GDL]

On a scale of 1 to 10, how much difficulty did Isreal have in obeying the Law from Exodus to Malachi?

That's just a rhetorical question of course. We both know they had tremendous difficulty.

On a score of A to F, they got an F most of the time.

You misunderstand my meaning and response to a prior post. I don't disagree with your rhetoric as you note and have no issue with you stating for me.

Acts 15:10 does speak a truth about doing the Mosaic Law under the previous Covenant. But it's typically put forth as a reasoning that we have nothing to do with Law anymore.

Also, as I and at least one other, @Soyeong I think, explained, the context is about doing Law to enter into salvation vs. entering by Faith through the grace of Jesus Christ.

If I take it further, yes Israel did fail in law keeping, or maybe the Law did what God designed it to do is a better way to approach it, but that was part of the purpose of the previous era, and even then, some could say they were blameless under Law (Luke 1:5-6; Philippians 3:4-6). And this blameless concept carries over into NC instruction, as do concepts of Law.

 

[Soyeong]

Deuteronomy 30:11 can be and is translated as
"For this commandment which I command you today is not too mysterious for you".

As in not to difficult to understand. Or too difficult to grasp.

That translation seems more likely to me as the history of Israel shows that they had a tremendously difficult time obeying it. I remember the first time I read the Old Testament how astounded I was at how disobedient they were most of the time. So if God actually said it wasn't too difficult for them to obey, then their history of rampant inability to obey would prove that wrong. Some were able like Moses, and David who was a man after God's own heart. But of course in the case of David, he also broke the law to the extreme.

And Moses was the worst of all because right away he broke all Ten Commandments at once! (old joke ).

Deuteronomy 30:11-14 “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 14 But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.

Verse 14 does not leave any room for saying that verse 11 about God's law being not too difficult to understand, but too difficult to do. There were a more evil kings than good kings, which in a condensed history makes it appear that the Israelites were disobedient most of the time, however, the good kings tended to live for much longer than the evil kings did, so if you add up the years, then the Israelites were under a good king for roughly 80% of the time, which was hardly a complete failure to keep the law. Furthermore, the times when the Israelites were disobedient were not because it was too difficult to obey, but because they chose to chase after other gods. In other words, there is no one who can stand before God and try to put the blame for their disobedience to His law on Him by saying that He gave laws that were too difficult to obey. God is not an unloving Father who gave instructions that are too difficult to obey to His children for the goal of cursing us for not following them, but rather God is a loving Father who knows how to give good gifts, and He gave them for our own good in order to teach us how to live blessed lives (Deuteronomy 6:24, 10:12-13).

 

[RobertPate]

Deuteronomy 30:11-14 “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 14 But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.

Verse 14 does not leave any room for saying that verse 11 about God's law being not too difficult to understand, but too difficult to do. There were a more evil kings than good kings, which in a condensed history makes it appear that the Israelites were disobedient most of the time, however, the good kings tended to live for much longer than the evil kings did, so if you add up the years, then the Israelites were under a good king for roughly 80% of the time, which was hardly a complete failure to keep the law. Furthermore, the times when the Israelites were disobedient were not because it was too difficult to obey, but because they chose to chase after other gods. In other words, there is no one who can stand before God and try to put the blame for their disobedience to His law on Him by saying that He gave laws that were too difficult to obey. God is not an unloving Father who gave instructions to His children for the goal of cursing them because they were too difficult to obey, but rather God is a loving Father who knows how to give good gifts, and He gave them for our own good in order to bless us (Deuteronomy 6:24, 10:12-13).

Living by law, rules and religion didn't work for the Pharisees and it is not going to work for you. Read the 23rd chapter of Matthew to see what Jesus thought of those law loving Pharisees.

 

[Soyeong]

I can appreciate your zeal for the law.
However, it is a very controversial subject with views on both sides.
I guess we are on the correct forum area for controversial Christian theology. - LOL

With that in mind, you can't really declare my interpretation as "wrong".
Let's face it, there are several contradictory statements about the law in the Bible.
Each side of the subject picks out the ones that support their view.

Therefore, I won't participate in a new debate with you,
knowing we will end in an impasse, or worse.

I like you. Let's not risk losing that. I accept you where you are at.
You did not establish your views on a whim, neither have I.

Saint Steven said: ↑
The Apostle Peter agreed.

Acts 15:10 NIV
Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear?

Thank you. Paul spoke about multiple categories of law other than the Law of God, such as works of the law, and the law of sin. For example, in Romans 7:25-8:2, he contrasted the Law of God with the law of sin and contrasted the Law of the Spirit of Life with the law of sin and death, and in Romans 3:27, he contrasted a law of works with a law of faith. In Romans 3:27, Paul spoke about a law that our faith upholds, while in Galatians 3:11, he spoke about a law that is not of faith, so indeed if we do not recognize that the Bible speaks about multiple different categories of law other than the Law of God, then it will appear as though it makes contradictory statements about the law. While Paul spoke against works of the law and the law of sin, he was a servant of God, so he never spoke against anyone obeying His law. I can and will declare that interpretations of the Bible that make it out to be contradicting itself are wrong, and people should be quicker to think that their interpretation of the Bible must be wrong than to think that it makes perfect sense to interpret the Bible as contradicting itself, or to think that it makes perfect sense to interpret the Bible as speaking against obeying what God has commanded.

 

[Soyeong]

Living by law, rules and religion didn't work for the Pharisees and it is not going to work for you. Read the 23rd chapter of Matthew to see what Jesus thought of those law loving Pharisees.

Jesus set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to God's law, so he was much more zealous for obedience to it than the Pharisees were, and he never criticized them for obeying it, but he did criticize them for not obeying it or for not obeying it correctly. For example, in Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that tithing was something that they ought to be doing while not neglecting weightier matters of the law of justice, mercy, and faith, so he was not opposing their obedience to God's law, but rather he was calling them to a fuller obedience to it in a manner that is in accordance with its weightier matters and free from hypocrisy.

 

[Guojing]

Sorry, missed this.

I'll say up front that this is error. If you are trying to do the same thing the legalists and Judaizers are doing by creating a "Spiritual Israel" and this is your point, great. Where is your Scripture?

The New Covenant held the promise of New Birth and the eternal indwelling (which is the source of the New Birth) and this promise from the Garden has been for all families of the earth, not just Israel.

And when men are born again they are no longer Jew or Gentile but they are one man in Christ.


God bless.

You can understand John's specific emphasis on being born again, as inextricably linked to Israel's relationship with God.

Their father, Abraham, was barren. Naturally, at his ripe old age, he could no longer have children.

God had to supernaturally intervene in his life to enable him to give birth to Issac.

Thru Issac, thru Jacob, thru his 12 sons, the nation literally came into existence.

Exodus 4:22 had a very insightful verse about this

And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:

This was reinforced in Jeremiah 31:9

9 They shall come with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them: I will cause them to walk by the rivers of waters in a straight way, wherein they shall not stumble: for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.

God considered Israel his first born son. They literally became a nation when God supernaturally rescued them from Egypt, separating the waters in the ocean until all of them literally cross over the water in dry land.

But as we all know, Israel broke their covenant of Law that was given at Mount Sinai. They killed or ignored all the prophets that God repeatedly sent to them when they were separated into 2 kingdoms and went into captivity under Babylon, and then under Persia.

Jesus used the parable of the tenants, one of my favorite parables to understand his first coming on Earth to Israel, in all 3 synoptic gospels. (Matthew 21:33-46; Mark 12:1-12; Luke 20:9-19) to illustrate this.

When Jesus and the 12 were preaching from Matt-John, they need to repent of rejecting God their Father in the OT, and believe in his Son is their promised King and Messiah, as foretold by their prophets.

God had mercy on them even when they killed his prophets (e.g. 2 Chronicles 24:20-22; Jeremiah 26:20-30; cf. Luke 13:34; Acts 7:52)., and is now sending his very own Son to Israel, to do a final persuasion to Israel to repent and believe in him.

If they do, as Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3, Israel will be born again.

That is why Paul never mentioned the necessity of being born again to us gentiles. That concept is irrelevant to us.

 

[GDL]

I can and will declare that interpretation of the Bible that make it out to be contradicting itself are wrong, and people should be quicker to think that their interpretation of the Bible is wrong than to think that it makes perfect sense to interpret the Bible as contradicting itself, or to interpret the Bible as speaking against obeying what God has commanded.

Nicely stated.

 

[HARK!]

MOD HAT ON

DUE TO MULTIPLE RULE VIOLATIONS

​