See the story about Rich man & Lazarus. Why did Jesus teach that the Law and Prophets were sufficient for salvation? Why did he state that resurrection from the dead would not convince a person who rejected the OT? Is not the NT then icing on the cake?
Why did Jesus teach Tanakh was sufficient for salvation?
- Thread starter billwald
- Start date
- Status
RTE (Road to Emmaus)
Well-Known Member
See the story about Rich man & Lazarus. Why did Jesus teach that the Law and Prophets were sufficient for salvation?
Because they spoke of Him. Have you never read that "the testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of Prophecy"?
Why did he state that resurrection from the dead would not convince a person who rejected the OT? Is not the NT then icing on the cake?
The NT is hidden in the OT. Thus Paul tells us at 1 Cor 3 that the veil over the Jews which stops them from seeing Christ in the OT, is removed once they come to Christ.
Note then that he whose vail was removed every time he entered the inner court of the tabernacle to speak with God, is said to have preferred the reproach of Christ to the pleasures of the world.
Because they spoke of Him. Have you never read that "the testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of Prophecy"?
Why did he state that resurrection from the dead would not convince a person who rejected the OT? Is not the NT then icing on the cake?
The NT is hidden in the OT. Thus Paul tells us at 1 Cor 3 that the veil over the Jews which stops them from seeing Christ in the OT, is removed once they come to Christ.
Note then that he whose vail was removed every time he entered the inner court of the tabernacle to speak with God, is said to have preferred the reproach of Christ to the pleasures of the world.
Upvote
0
nobdysfool
The original! Accept no substitutes!
- Feb 23, 2003
- 15,018
- 1,006
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Constitution
The truth is, the Law and the Prophets could save a person, provided they kept it perfectly, 100% of the time. Problem is, only One could do so, which was Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Remember that if one is guilty of one transgression of the Law, they are guilty of transgressing the whole Law? And once done, they could no longer keep it perfectly, because of that transgression. Thus, the Law and the Prophets pointed to Jesus, because only God could keep God's Law, and Jesus came to fulfill the Law, to reconcile His Bride to Himself. Jesus did what we could not, that we could be what we were not, Children of God, and joint-heirs with Christ.
Upvote
0
marktheblake
Member
- Aug 20, 2008
- 1,039
- 26
- Faith
- Pentecostal
- Marital Status
- Married
The thief on the cross simply asked "remember me" and he was saved. Jesus healed the paralysed man because of the faith of his freinds that lowered him through the roof.
I am not so sure what is the minimum needed for salvation
I am not so sure what is the minimum needed for salvation
Upvote
0
themuzicman
Senior Member
I would say that the NT is the indirect exposition of the New Covenant (thus the name "New Testament".) The OT pointed to a New Covenant and to the coming of the Messiah. The NT is the narrative of how the New Covenant came about, the teachings of the High Priest of that New Covenant, and the recording of how that New Covenant is to be understood and lived out from those who saw and were taught by Christ.
Muz
Upvote
0
heymikey80
Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
The Fall is the hunger.
The OT is the plate.
The NT is the cake (or the Meal).
Final Victory is the icing.
Upvote
0
RTE (Road to Emmaus)
Well-Known Member
The OT is the plate.
The NT is the cake (or the Meal).
Yes and I've never seen anybody eat a plate yet.
The NT is the cake (or the Meal).
Yes and I've never seen anybody eat a plate yet.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
