"Torah Observant"

Boy oh boy
You sure do have a lot of unfounded and unscriptural opinions. You read an awful lot into scripture thats just not there. I understand you must do this because the doctrines you believe are not scriptural. I asked 1 question. When Jesus said and i quote

"but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments"

I said i believed Him. You do not. I asked why?

Do you think for your much writing you can fool me. Ahhh... the "many"

Your pride and vanity will do you in

 

You didn't understand a word I said did you? There is a contextual reason for that response by Christ! Did you get it?

Let me try this.

QUESTION: what was the basis that this man came to Jesus on to obtain eternal life?

TEXT: "What GOOD thing shall I DO" is the basis

QUESTION: What was Christ's immediate response to that question?

Now let me probe your depth of understanding. Did Christ immediately respond as you suggest "but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments" or is there another response by Christ before this that the the first word "but" refers back to??

It only takes the ability to read to see that Jesus did not respond immediately with "BUT if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments."

No, that was not his immediate response. His immediate response was:

"Why callest thou me good, for there is NONE GOOD but ONE and that is God."


Now, ask yourself why Christ immediately responded in this way to his question and not as you suggest??? What purpose does this response serve in regard to the question presented by the Young Man? Can you think that deep? Try this. What common word is there in the question of the young man that is also in this immediate response by Christ???? Try this,


"GOOD master, what GOOD thing shall I do to inherit eternal life"
"Why callest thou me GOOD, for there is none GOOD but one and that is God."

Can you see any word in the first sentence that you can find in the second sentence?????? Let me help you. It is a word that is spelled the same in both sentences- got it????

Now, ask yourself what kind of response is this by Christ? Is it answering his question? Do you find any answer in this immediate response to his question??? No, this is not a answer at all. This is a correction, a rebuke, at the very minimum a clarification concerning the use of the term "good" by the rich young ruler.

Now, ask yourself what kind of correction? What kind of clarification? How does Christ correct, rebuke or clarify the use of "good" by this man?

Well lets look at it. He uses the term "good" twice does he not??? "GOOD Master, what GOOD thing shall I do...."

Which part needs correction, clarification or rebuking? Is it the part that says "GOOD Master"? Is Christ denying himself to be intrinsically "good"? Is he denying that he is "God"???? Do you really beleive that????

Well, if he is not correcting, rebuking or clarifying something about Himself then who do you suppose is left? Right! The young man's own evaluation of himself . He has placed himself EQUAL to Christ by the use of the same term to describe Christ that he uses to describe his own inherent ability to do "good".

Now, let's see if Christ's rebuke would deny, correct, clarify that this young man is not inherently good and therefore is incapable of doing inherent goodness. What does Christ say?


"THERE IS NONE GOOD" - Well, would not that contradict the young man's opinion of his own ability to do good?

"THERE IS NONE GOOD BUT ONE" - Well, which "ONE"! Is it the rich young ruler that "ONE" or someone else? Both cannot be as the numerical "ONE" does not mean TWO or more does it??????

"THERE IS NONE GOOD BUT ONE and it is YOU"????? or "GOD"??? Which one do you think is the answer?????

Tell me, if you put yourself into that same question provided by the young ruler do you think it would change Christ's response????? Apparently you do, as you are approaching Christ on the very same basis!!!

Now, you and the young man can prove Christ wrong in but one way! "BUT if thou wilt enter life, keep the commandments"

Do you see the word "but"?? Jesus rebukes his basis for seeking eternal life "BUT" it goes right over his head and Christ knows it, just like it goes right over your head because neither of you have any spiritual ability to discern truth.

"BUT" if you don't believe me that there is NONE GOOD but ONE and that is God then prove me wrong and keep the commandments, because if you can do that then you will inherit eternal life.


Now, this is waaaaay over your head even though I broke it down in baby steps. You can't see it. You won't believe it. You are just like the young man, so we have to go on and explain "which" law to you. We have to explain what that law actually means in practical terms to you "If thou wilt be PERFECT" and still you will turn away from that explanation just as he did.

Why? Because you are attempting to do the "IMPOSSIBLE"! Why is it impossible??? BECAUSE

"THERE IS NONE GOOD but ONE and that is" NOT YOU!

 

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_Apostolic_Christianity_(Sabbatarian)

google noahide

 

I had to go babysit my grandchildren and so I had to cut it short. Let me pick up where I left off.

Christ rejected the supposition claimed by this young man that he could do something "good" to obtain eternal life. That was his correction, his rebuke, but He knew his rebuke went right over the head of the young man and the proof it went right over the head of the young man was his continued insistance that he not only could do "good" but had done "good" from his youth up.

This is precisely why Jesus then, said "but" - and returned to answer the question of the young man - "but, if thou wilt enter life keep the commandments."

Why did Jesus rebuke him and then respond in this manner? Because the commandments are God's measuring stick to define wht God means by "good" .

Do this and you can prove Christ was wrong and you are right. Christ flatly denied anyone but "ONE" could do "good" but this man insists he can and already has. So Christ put him to the test and pointed him to the standard that defines what "good" is and sure enough IF he should be able to do "good" by God's standard then Christ would be wrong and he would obtain eternal life and heaven.

However, this man, like you, didn't understand the purpose of the law. He thought all he would have to do is just keep one or more of the more significant Laws of God and so he asks "WHICH"?

Why would he ask "WHICH"? If he had understood that breaking ANY Law of God condemns him as a sinner then he would not have asked "WHICH"? If he would have understood that to break the law in ONE POINT is to break it in EVERY point, he would not have asked "WHICH"? He fundementally misunderstood the design and purpose of God's Law. The law was given to reveal the knowledge of sin not as a means for SINNERS to obtain eternal life? It only takes ONE sin to be a sinner and ALL HAVE SINNED and therefore "THERE IS NONE GOOD" by the Law's standard "but ONE and that is God."

Jesus was very patient with this man. Jesus started naming off that part of the ten commandments which were on the second tablet - the part having to do with man and then he summarized those five by his last words "love thy neighbor as thyself."

Why didn't Jesus respond by giving him the first five? Because Jesus knew that this man did not love his neighbor and later would prove it by reducing these five down into a very practical test. However, Jesus told him to do these and how did the young man respond????

"I have kept these from my youth up" - Remember what jesus had told him? "But if thou wilt enter into life, KEEP the commandments." Now, how does the young man respond - "I HAVE KEPT" them! What is this young man saying? He is calling Christ a liar for Christ had said "there is NONE good but ONE and that is God" but this man says "I HAVE KEPT THESE" meaning I can do "good" and I have done "good" and so God is not the only "ONE" who is good or can do good - I can!

However, this man, like you has a very superficial understanding of what the law approves as "good." He fails to understand the Law's definition of "good" or he would never have said "I have kept these FROM MY YOUTH UP." If he had understood How God defines "good" enough to enter heaven he would never have disputed Christ's claim that there is "NONE good but ONE and that is God." He simply did not understand how God or God's law defined "good" enough to enter heaven and so Christ tells him:

"If thou wilt be PERFECT" - Now let us analyze this response by Christ. Christ has told this man that there is "NONE good but ONE and that is GOD"! What kind of standard of "good" then is Jesus demanding when he said there is "NONE good but ONE and that is God"??? What kind of standard of "good" would eliminate all but "ONE and that is God"???

Would doing the best I can eliminate all but God? Would being characteristically good eliminate all but God? What definition of "good" would "NONE" qualify but "ONE" and that is "GOD"? Is it not found in the word "perfect" and thus Jesus said "If thou wilt be PERFECT"????

Does this mean that the young man was wrong when he said "All these I HAVE KEPT from my youth up"????? Apparently, Jesus did not beleive him because he said "IF thou wilt" meaning he had not attained that standard!

Now, let us consider what Jesus told him to do in order to be "PERFECT"! He told him,


"Go sell ALL that thou hast and give it to the poor and come follow me"

This is a commandment by God in the flesh. Remember, that Jesus only chose that part of the ten commandments that dealt with loving your neighbor as yourself when the young man asked "which" commandments should he keep!! Remember, the young man had claimed "These I have kept from my youth up"! BUT HAD HE?????? Jesus puts him to the ultimate test to prove to him He had not and that there is really "NONE good but ONE and that is God."

Did he really keep the commandments that define what it is to love his neighbor as himself from his youth up???? If he had, or if he could then he could prove it right here and now! He was very rich and there were neighbors/those in need who were very poor and he had what it took to help them?

However, this is a test of faith also! You see if he sold all that he had and gave it to the poor then how would he survive? What would he do? To obey Christ would not only prove he did love his neighbor as himself but it would also require faith in Christ to do this! Christ called him to "come and follow me"!! However, did he have the faith to do that? Did he have a faith that could trust ONLY IN GOD to meet all his needs????? Did he have a faith that could totally deny himself and comletely trust in Christ? Did he really love his neigbor as himself or even really love God? The proof is not in the rhetoric but in the pudding or where the rubber meets the road.

How did he respond to THIS COMMAND by God? He responded in DISOBEDIENCE and his response demonstrated HE NEVER KEPT ANY OF GOD'S LAW from his youth up or at any point of time in all his life. He did not really understand what it means to "keep the commandments."

Christ proved his words "NONE good but ONE and that is God" and demonstrated this man had NO INHERENT GOODNESS and therefore NO INHERENT ABILITY TO DO GOOD for he was a SINNER who had already broken God's law and was under its condemnation.

God's law defines "good" enough to justify eternal life as "PERFECT" and that is exactly why there is "NONE good but ONE and that is GOD."


24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?
26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

This makes it "IMPOSSIBLE" for any man to obtain eternal life by attempting to keep God's Law because the only standard the Law approves for eternal life is to be as good as the "GOD" standard. It is easier for a camel to go through an eye of a needle than for those "RICH" in SELF RIGHTEOUSNESS to enter the kingdom of God. The young ruler's real wealth was HIS VIEW OF HIMSELF/HIS SELF DEPENDENCY/SELF RIGHTOUSNESS. That is exactly what every man is rich in when they come to Christ on the BASIS "what GOOD thing shall I DO" as this young man did - RICH in the false idea of inherent goodness that you actually believe you can keep God's commandments GOOD ENOUGH to obtain eternal life!!

Whoever comes to God on this basis is claiming they ARE AS GOOD AS GOD and simply do not believe that there is "NONE good but ONE and that is GOD."

This is precisely why YOU use this text because YOU believe exactly like this young man and YOU come to Christ exactly on the same basis he did and YOU do not beliver there is "NONE good but ONE and that is God."

 

Let me pick up where I left off. I rushed through the latter part of this story. Let's pick up where the Rich man disobeyed Christ's command and where the Lord turns to his disciples and makes his point concerning this man.

22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.
23 ¶ Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

In the mind of this young man, Christ had called upon him to give up everything for eternal life! But really, Christ was calling on him to give up just one thing - His greatest riches, the very thing he was most rich in - his belief in his own inherent ability to do good! This belief consisted of an assortment of riches of self-esteem, self-righteousness, self-dependency, selfishness. Here was his real riches that he refused to give up! His view of himself was only reflected by his refusal to give to the poor his external earthly wealth. His real riches are reflected in the following two statements:

"What GOOD THING SHALL I DO"

"ALL THESE THINGS I HAVE DONE FROM MY YOUTH UP"

This man did not believe Christ's word that there is "NONE GOOD, but ONE and that is GOD."

He already saw himself as inherently "GOOD" in his own eyes by his first statement above - "What GOOD thing shall I DO."

He already saw himself as RICH and WEALTHY in goodness by the second statement above "ALL THESE THINGS have I DONE FROM MY YOUTH UP."

He absolutely did not believe that there was "NONE good, but ONE and that is GOD." Neither do you!

So, how did the ruler respond to Christ's command? A Command that would not only demonstrate he did not love his neighbor as himself and that his real riches were HIMSELF above others. A Command that would not only demonstrate he did not have faith in God or in Christ to sustain him after giving up his material weath. A command that would prove he was not only a sinner but an unrepentant sinner.

So, he went away very sorrowful! Not sorrowful over his sin. No! Not convinced he was a sinner and that there was "NONE good but one and that is God." No, he went away sorrowful because this command revealed where and what was his REAL TREASURE and it wasn't in heaven - himself. It revealed his own heart, for where your treasure is there is your heart also. It revealed that his belief in his own inherent goodness was his greatest treasure. It revealed he had no INHERENT GOOD HEART but a corrupted self-centered, self-sufficient, self-righteous, selfish heart that neither loved God or man. It confirmed Christ's initial rebuke to his assertion that he could do "good" enough when in fact "there is NONE good but One and that is God."

So how did Jesus respond to this open and manifest disobedience by the young man. What was the summation of this man by Christ?

23 ¶ Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God

However, Job, Abraham, David, and Daniel were extremely rich men and went to heaven! So did Christ lie? Some believe that Christ really didn't mean what he said. Some believe the illustration does not mean it is impossible but only more difficult. They believe the "eye of the needle" was the name of a low gate in the city wall that made it more difficult or "hard" for camels to come in.

However, remember Jesus had already laid down the premise for an IMPOSSIBILTY for this man to come to God by belief in his OWN INHERENT GOODNESS which this man was extremely RICH in! Christ has already elminated the POSSIBILITY of salvation for any men rich in self-confidence of their own ability to do good. "There is NONE good but one" and that eliminates all who come to God believing they are able to do "good" enough by the Law's standard to obtain eternal life.

Furthermore, he goes on to bluntly say "WITH MEN THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE" not merely hard! He said "THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE" in response to the question by his disciples "Who then can be saved" - "THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE"

It is not "IMPOSSIBLE" for men to be saved for many have been saved. What was "IMPOSSIBLE" is for men to be saved ON THE BASIS that this young ruler came to obtain eternal life - by way of PERSONAL ABILLITY - PERSONAL RIGHTEOUSNESS - PERSONAL WORKS because the standard of the Law required "GOOD" works and "GOOD" works can only originate from a "GOOD" person but the Law of God does not consider any person to be "GOOD" who has violated even ONE of its precepts but regards them as CONDEMNED SINNERS and so there is "NONE GOOD but ONE" and that is God.

CONCLUSION: You asked what did Christ mean when he said "But, if thou wilt enter life, keep the commandments." He meant exactly what he said! Anyone, who can "keep" the commandments as defined by God and His Law, then they will be JUSITIFED as worthy of obtaining eternal life. However, anyone who has ever SINNED but once will be CONDEMNED by the Law as a SINNER and will not enter life but enter hell. That is God's standard of "good" enough for the Law to justify you as "GOOD" enough to enter life!

I have got bad news for you and for anyone who is so rich in self-confidence that they can say "What GOOD thing SHALL I DO" to obtain eternal life! There is "NONE good" enough to come by that route but "ONE" and it is NOT YOU and thus NOT BY YOUR WORKS. With men THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE.

However, I have some good news, if you will admit you are not GOOD enough and that you cannot do GOOD enough! WITH GOD ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE and GOD IS GOOD ENOUGH and God manifested Himself in the flesh and satisfied the standard of the Law in regard to its standard of righteousness and its penalty for sin FOR YOU if you will repent of self-righteousness! Salvation begins with "repentance from dead works" - your works! Until you repent of the very thought of saying "What GOOD thing SHALL I DO" to obtain eternal life, there is no salvation for you or anyone else that comes by the route of YOUR OWN OBEDIENCE to the Law. There is no salvation, no life gained by your own works but rather condemnation unto death and therefore that route is called "DEAD works." It is called "DEAD works" because your works do not measure up to God's standard of "good" enough to escape the condemnation of the Law and what comes under the condemnation of the law produces DEATH not life. Therefore, your salvation begins with "repentance from dead works." Your faith must be in God's righteousness provided in the Person and work of Jesus Christ alone not in self-righteousness. Here is the lesson of the rich young ruler because there is "NONE good but ONE and that is" NOT YOU, NOT YOUR WORKS.

You and the rich young ruler share the same soteriology - another gospel -and both of you are calling Christ a liar when he says "There is NONE good but ONE" as you both come on the same basis to Christ - not on Christ's merits in your behalf, but on your own merits of obedience by law keeping. So you call Christ a liar and deny there is but "ONE" that is good. You and the young ruler believe you are as GOOD AS GOD as you include yourself with God as being "good" enough to pass the Law's definition of "good."

BEFORE YOU RESPOND! Reread, my last three expository posts on the Rich young ruler and try to at least understand what I have said and then, respond by pointing out specifically where my exposition of any statement is wrong and WHY it is wrong due to the context. Point out the contextual factor that shows I have misinterpreted either Christ's words of the words of this young ruler.

 

GE:

Chowman, Dr Walter is not only correct; he speaks the TRUTH as it is in Jesus Christ, here.

I think you should redirect all your accusations against Dr Walter in this instance, against YOURSELF.

"... if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments" AND SEE HOW FAR YOU GET!

 

>1. Note the basis upon which this person chooses to approach this question to Christ

>ANSWER: "what GOOD thing shall I DO"

No one ever asks why THIS question so I will. Why? Why did it pop up in his mind?

 

I hope I am understanding your question correctly. I understand you to be asking "why did it = to enquire about eternal life - pop up in the mind of this ruler?

I think he was seeking confirmation of what he already believed himself to be worthy! When Christ pointed him to the law he immediately replied "which" because he already kept the law and said so -"ALL THESE I have kept from my youth up"

Furthermore, when he added "what lack I yet", I believe it was both an assertion and a challenge. It was an assertion that He believed he had done everything the law required and it was a challenge to Christ to prove He had not. Jesus gave up his glory and became the servant of men. He practiced complete and total self-denial in becoming sin when he did not sin. He practiced complete and total trust in God to sustain his every need. He proved He was as GOOD as God because He was God in the flesh. What he required of this young man was exactly what he practiced in his own life.

Of course Christ met that challenge by placing the second table of commandments into a practical command. If you really as "good" as God's Law demands and if you really have kept these commandments which require to love your neighbor as yourself then put it into practice and do this - sell all that you have and give it to the poor and come follow me.

Jesus changed the conversation from rhetoric to backing up his rhetoric with actions. In order to back up his rhetoric by these actions it would require complete and total trust in God to sustain his needs, it would require complete and total self-denial, it would require complete and total devotion to Christ - in short it would require to be as GOOD AS GOD or as Jesus defined what the law really demanded - "if thou wilt be PERFECT"

 

I wanna thank GE, Mr Walters and Annsni for trying to help me understand the 1st scripture below. Youve all been very helpful. Could you now help me with the rest of the scriptures below.

DO YOU WANT ETERNAL LIFE
MATT.19 [16] And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?[17] And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS.[18] He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,

DO YOU KNOW GOD
1 JOHN 2 [1] My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: [2] And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. [3] And hereby we do know that we know him, if we KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS. [4] He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

HAVE YOU BEEN TAUGHT “JUST BELIEVE” AND YOU WILL BE SAVED
JAMES 2 [19] Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: THE DEVILS ALSO BELIEVE, and tremble.

DO YOU LOVE GOD
1 JOHN 5 [1] Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. [2] By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS. [3] For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

DO YOU WANT GODS HOLY SPIRIT
JOHN 14 [15] If ye love me, KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS.[16] And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;[17] Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

HAS HEAVEN AND EARTH PASSED – YIKES! WHAT AM I STANDING ON?
MATT.5 [17] Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.[18] For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

WANT TO BE ONE OF GODS SAINTS
REV.14 [12] Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS of God, and the faith of Jesus

BEEN TAUGHT DUE TO FAITH WE NEED NOT KEEP GODS COMMANDMENTS
ROMANS 3 [31] Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

WANT TO ENTER THE CITY - THE 1000yr PERIOD OF REST
REV.22 [14] Blessed are they that DO HIS COMMANDMENTS, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city

IS GODS SABBATH COMMANDMENT GRIEVOUS TO YOU
1JOHN.5 [1] Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.[2] By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.[3] For this is the love of God, that WE KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS: AND HIS COMMANDMENTS ARE NOT GRIEVOUS.

They all seem to be saying the same thing I found in Matthew 19 but im sure you can help me understand why these scriptures do not mean what they say, just as you did with Matt.19. Thank you all for your help

 

Perhaps I can help you understand the meaning of "honesty"? You start with the very text you thank everyone for helping you understand! Very hypocritical and disengenuous.

 

You sure do like to say things about what is written as if they were actually said when they were not. I did not say for "helping me understand" as you interpreted my words. The way i interpreted what i said is "TRYING to help me undetrstand". The reason i interpret it that way is because that is what i wrote. Maybe there was a little sarcasm and for that im sorry but the fact is youll have to come up with a song and dance for all those scriptures that say what you dont want them to say.

But you wont

And my thank you is from the heart. You 3 will actually discuss whats written. You are the few amoung the many

 

I placed the contextual evidences before you concerning the rich young ruler. The burden of proof is on you to prove I have misinterpreted or misrepresented that evidence. Simply asserting I have closes any kind of two way substantive discussion. For example, I could just list proof texts and then dismiss any response you make by simply asserting your are wrong and relisting the text! Think about it! That kind of response is irrational and another escape method.

Why should I even consider trying to explain another text when you can't even give a rational and reasonable contextual based response to this one?????????

 

OK. So how do you interpret scripture below

1 JOHN 5 [1] Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. [2] By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS. [3] For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

 

I told you at the first that i would not argue opinion. Thats alls i get from you. And your opinions come from the doctrines youve been taught

 

That would be a good and fresh approach. You do mean proof text as scripture do you not. That would be great. Lets see them.

 

O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

In the flesh we will transgress the law. We need salvation from the flesh.

and man became a living soul. That is the body of this death. He was very good but he was not perfect. He would need to be changed. He was subject to death.

And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by the faith: (of God by the faith of Christ)
If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead. Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect:

Paul understood his perfection comes at the resurrection from the dead.

And how will he, the soul Paul be found?

For in this we (Our souls) groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. For we (Our souls) that are in [this] tabernacle (Body of flesh) do groan, being burdened: not for that we (Our souls) would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

For this corruptible (Body of flesh) must put on incorruption, and this mortal (Soul) [must] put on immortality.


Then we will serve the law of God and will not be able to sin.

 

The above response demonstrates there is no hope to attempt any kind of rational and reasonable discussion with you. You have not proven my exposition is mere opinion. You simply assert it is and expect readers to take your word for it! I don't require that kind of stupidity from any reader. I require them to use their God given mind and to obey Paul's command to "prove all things" by the contextual evidence that I place before them. You either are not capable of doing that or are not willing and yet you want to speak authoritative about what the Bible does and does not teach. That is simply irrational. You cannot teach what you do not know and you cannot condemn the intepretation of others if you cannot demonstrate by reasonable evidence their interpretation is incorrect.

Any reader looking at the response above and the other response that suggests we just provide competing lists of proof texts and thus pit scripture against scripture demonstrate you are not competent to teach anyone anything about this subject.

Your response to my exposition demonstrates you do not have any inward spiritual ability to discern or accept truth regardless how simple it is broken down and fed to you. The sad thing is this is true concerning the very truth that is necessary to beleive to be saved.

Hence, there is no point to continue this discussion. Instead I will pray for you that God may have mercy on your soul and give you a new heart that is able to preceive truth, see truth and hear truth. Until He does this it is like telling a blind man to see and a deaf man to hear.