New covenant scriptures

It is a foolish and false kind of logic that reasons if salvation is the same for Israel and its house of God (the temple) as well as for the Gentile and its house of God (the church) then texts that apply the same salvation to both must mean that Israel and Gentiles are one and the same and the temple and the church are one and the same. None of this is true.

Israel is ethnic national Israel and the Gentiles are non-Israelites. The "church" corresponds to the "temple" and neither is salvation but rather are institutions identified as "the house of God" (1 Tim. 3:15) for the saved to serve in and through and for the ordained ministry to officiate within (1 Tim. 3:1-13).

 

You have had these scriptures explained to you over and over again and every time incapable of responding except by jumping to another text. However, I will one more time attempt to show you what these texts mean according to the immediate and overall context.

This text and the one where the Rich young ruler came to Christ are about the same thing in regard to the same kind of person who is seeking eternal life based upon their OWN WORKS rather than any kind of faith in Christ or the works of Christ in their behalf.

You will note two obvious things about this passage and the one concerning the rich young ruler - there is no gospel preached or offered by Christ as Christ presented the gospel to Nicodemus in John 3:15-19. Christ NEVER invites them to believe in him or come to him as in John 3;15-19.

Secondly, both persons addressed are SELF-RIGHTEOUS persons in their OWN EYES. Both believe they are capable of DOING something themselves to obtain eternal life. DOING not believing in someone else.

Jesus never came to call the righteous because no such person really exists outside the imagination of a sinner (Rom. 3:9-10). Remember, Jesus told the rich young ruler explicitly "THERE IS NONE GOOD BUT ONE and THAT IS GOD."

However, a person who is looking to be saved by DOING something to make God indebted to them because of their works to bestow eternal life is for them to keep the law WITHOUT ONE FAILURE or else they come "SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD" (Rom. 3:23). The "glory" of God is his moral righteousness or what is called His "holiness" wherein NO SIN can be found. This is precisely how James defines keeping the law (James 2:10-11) so that not ONE POINT is violated.

This is the message for RIGHTEOUS DO-GOODERS like yourself and this is how keeping the law is defined for such. Do this and you will obtain eternal life. Jesus did this and Jesus merited the approval of the law but CAN YOU???? If you can, then eternal life is yours. However, the scriptures repeatedly state that NONE can (Rom. 3:9-11; 23). However, the message Jesus gave to the Lawyer and to the Rich young ruler is the only message you can give to one who believes they can keep the law in order to obtain eternal life - go for it!

Howeve, the law is not of faith (Gal. 3:12) and only faith in the obedience of Christ to the law FOR YOU both in regard to satisfying its righteous demands for life and penalty for sin can obtain eternal life for sinners. However, since you don't recognize yourself as a sinner but as one capable of keeping the law according to its holy demands - sinlessness - then go for it!


Ac 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

However, you think "could not be" means "can be" so go for it!

 

dw

That Israel is not the Children of God Rom 9:8

8That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

 

I've been browsing through this thread for the first time and really enjoying it.
Perhaps this will help. It's Chapter XIX of the 1689 Baptist Confession. It may serve to answer Chowmah's questions.
Enjoy! :thumbsup:

Steve

 

Your right concerning Israel right now! But that Israel SHALL BE the children of God as God is not only "able to graft them in again" but shall "when the fullness of the Gentiles be COME IN and so "all Israel shall be saved" - the same Israel that had been formerly "cut off" the same Israel that is presently now the "enemies of the gospel for YOUR sakes"! In that day, ETHNIC NATIONAL ISRAEL will all be SPIRIT BORN ETHNIC NATIONAL ISRAEL.

 

Thats always been the case. The Israel according to Abraham's flesh only, is liken to Ishmael, who can never be a Child of promise and Heir.

Gal 4:30

Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

The shall not cuts off future hope of that changing..

Israel after the Flesh can never become what Israel after the Spirit has become and will inherit. You actually teach against this Truth !


The Israel after the flesh, are not the Children of God Rom 9:8

8That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

Only Children are Heirs.

 

First of all you are taking Paul's words out of context in Galatians. He is not dealing with the salvation or damnation of any nation much less Israel as a nation. He is dealing with the doctrine of justification by works versus justification by grace. It is the oppoents of Paul and their doctrine of justification by works or the OLD COVENANT that Paul is likening to Hagar and Ishmael. So again, you just jerk texts out of context just use as proof texts for a pretext.

Second, in the context where Paul is dealing with Israel as a nation he explicitly states they have been "cut off" but will be graft in "AGAIN" (Rom. 11:23. When they are graft in "again" they will be a nation of believers as "all Israel" shall be saved when Chrsit comes from heaven.

I have documented this proof in another thread in posts #36 and #38 which you have not dared to respond to at all in any kind of comprehensive manner. Why? Because you can't and because your doctrine is based wholly and totally upon proof texting out of context.

 

Note the answer:

 

Do you think Jesus meant the whole Mitzvot or just the 10?

 

Doesn't that fall under adultary? Or basically sex outside of marriage?

 

Consider that the Ten commandments are divided into two basic commandments to love God (first five) and to love your neighbor as yourself (second five) and then summarized by one word "love."

Hence, why not the reverse? Why could not all the other commandments (principles and precepts) be summarized by the ten?

 

Actually I believe the Mitzvot are but thats from my Jewish training. The Jewish understanding of the 10 commandments or the Aseret ha-Dibrot is that each one is a catagory to itself. Each of the 613 Mitzvot are classed under these.