Theology Club: Is MAD doctrine correct?

[Shasta]

Go ahead and show this in the red letters real quick if you don't mind. Meaning him telling them he was dying for their sin, show where he explained Isaiah 53, the Passover, how it all related to him and how he said to enter into life.

Allow me.

Matthew 5

18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 19

16 Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?”

17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

Matthew 23

Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, 2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do.

Rather than go on and on and on with the requirements to enter the kingdom of heaven...I will respond with a quick one from Paul.

17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.

Romans 7

10 And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death.

Yes, this man wanted to do a good deed and thereby enter eternal life. Well, it does not work that way and Jesus immediately showed him that he had it fundamentally wrong. Good does not originate FROM man but from God who alone is good. This verse must be taken in the overall context of Jesus teachings. Christ was not a Pharisee or even just a moralistic Rabbi. He did nothing out of His own initiative (John 5:19). His life source was the Father and his words, works and character came from Him (John 14:9-10).

Jesus did not for a moment fall into the presupposition of human goodness."Good actions" "Godly character," righteousness was never something man could do or live out apart from the Spirit. If we could then the Old Covenant which consisted of men not born of the Spirit attempting to follow the rules of righteousness without the Spirit. It never worked which is why the Old Covenant had to be done away with and replaced with a New Covenant (Hebrews 8:7-8).

When Jesus tells the man if he wanted to inherit eternal life he must keep the commands He is presented him with a conundrum. Yes if the man could walk in conformity to the will of God He would have Eternal Life but the fact was he could not. Trying to do so would lead him down the path of Romans 7. At the end, if he gave up and cried "who will deliver me?" That is the point when we are ready to look away from ourselves and put our faith in Him. That Jesus should push people to this point (that of seeing the impossibility) is the way the Spirit deals with religious people. It is the way he dealt with Paul and Martin Luther. Only when we reach the place of powerlessness and surrender can we begin to walk in newness of life. However the fulfillment of that part had to await His crucifixion and resurrection. Nevertheless He preached it in advance. Jesus did not preach salvation by good works. According to Him eternal life was in Him and could only be found by believing in Him (John 3:16).

Jesus did not tell people they could keep the law. To the contrary He said 39“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; 40and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life (John 5:39-40)

What He said about heeding the Rabbis words had to do with their teachings from scripture. Even this was not absolute because they taught doctrines that were not scripture but tradition. Jesus own teaching was not that of a typical rabbi. Of many weighty areas of the Law he made no comment at all. Other laws He superseded. All the while he guided people to the essence of morality.

Since the Old Covenant would be intact for a few more years He could not tell people to abandon all the practices of the Mosaic system but neither did he reinforce them. The "law" that He taught (when you look at it) was that same law which would be written human heart by the Spirit when the New Covenant would be formed.

Paul never urged Jews to abandon every practice of Judaism. At one point he even assisted someone in completing a Nazarite vow. He did not, however, teach anyone (Jew or Gentile) that they should practice all the rituals. Peter, who ministered quite a bit to the Jews did not (according to Paul) live like a Jew himself. Paul did not rebuke him for that just for his complicity with those who would impose that way of life on the Gentiles. Whatever a "Jewish Gospel" might have entailed it did not involve living a Jewish lifestyle, so what did it involve?

 

[Lighthouse]

Thanks for admitting the change to Paul's gospel.

Exodus 4

24 And it came to pass on the way, at the encampment, that the Lord met him and sought to kill him. 25 Then Zipporah took a sharp stone and cut off the foreskin of her son and cast it at Moses’ feet, and said, “Surely you are a husband of blood to me!” 26 So He let him go. Then she said, “You are a husband of blood!”—because of the circumcision.

Seems circumcision isn't "nothing" unless you are referring to Paul's gospel.

:thumb:

the plan was for Jews to repent then take their gospel to the rest of the world , that did not happen so Jesus turned to Saul the destroyer of the church taught him directly rather than learn from the 12.

agree ?

Mat 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithes of mint and dill and cummin, and you have left undone the weightier matters of the Law, judgment, mercy, and faith. You ought to have done these and not to leave the other undone.

:thumb:

Peter preached:

Acts 2:38 KJV Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Paul preached:

1 Corinthians 15:3 KJV For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;


Peter preached that Jesus Christ was raised from the dead to sit on David’s throne:

Acts 2:30 KJV Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

Paul preached that Jesus Christ was delivered for our offences and raised again for our justification:

Romans 4:25 KJV Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.



Peter preached the blotting out of sins at the second coming of the Lord

Acts 3:19-20 KJV Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; 20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:

Paul writes that we have NOW received the atonement:

Romans 5:11 KJV And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.


Peter said it was spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began:

Acts 3:21 KJV Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

Paul said it was kept secret since the world began:

Romans 16:25 KJV Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,


Peter said to Cornelius:

Acts 10:35 KJV But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Paul writes:

Titus 3:5 KJV Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Things that are different are NOT the same!

:BRAVO:

I am a martyr. Someone has to do it.K:

Throwing yourself into the middle of it doesn't make you a martyr, it makes you a fool.

 

[Nick M]

Fred?

You blasphemer.

 

[Shasta]

the plan was for Jews to repent then take their gospel to the rest of the world , that did not happen so Jesus turned to Saul the destroyer of the church taught him directly rather than learn from the 12.
agree ?

I agree. The Jews should have done that. It would have been a place of honor for them to do so. We might have had less error if we had stayed in touch with our Jewish roots. Who knows? Man has the ability to choose. He would have gathered them but "they would not."
However, God has a way of making things work out even better despite the rebellion of his chosen.

Saul was the perfect instrument by background, training and temperament to lead the way in bringing the gospel to the Gentiles. I do not look at it as God having no choice but to turn to Saul. Saul, like Israel could have refused. Instead he was "not obedient to the heavenly vision"

Peter and the others continued with the Jews and occasionally with Gentiles in the book of Acts. Historically as the ratio of Gentiles to Jews increased in the Churches they would have ministered increasingly to mixed groups. Thus we see Peter, as well as Apollos and Paul ministering to the mixed congregation at Corinth.

Eusebius says various members of the original twelve went to the nations outside Israel. The Church leaders the end of the First Century reported that John, then the only remaining member of the Twelve lived in Ephesus. He was well known, influential and traveled. The generations of leaders he trained were not primarily Jewish His gospel the last to be written is universal rather than Jewish in tone and focus unlike, say, that of Matthew. John's letters which were written in the last decade of the First Century were universally regarded as inspired, authoritative and applicable to the lives of all believers.

Mat 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithes of mint and dill and cummin, and you have left undone the weightier matters of the Law, judgment, mercy, and faith. You ought to have done these and not to leave the other undone.

It is not inappropriate for Jesus to tell that what they ought to have done. However as always He redirected their attention to deeper more significant issues. Those matters - judgment, mercy and faith are "weightier" because they emanate from the character of God. This has not changed. God is just and merciful and our proper response to Him is still to put our faith in Him. As for tithing, that was a part of the Mosaic system designed to provide support for the Levites, priests, temple and the poor. Now that Old Covenant has passed away God's dwelling is within man and the High Priest ministers intercedes for us in the heavens.

 

[Nick M]

Yes, this man wanted to do a good deed and thereby enter eternal life. Well, it does not work that way

16 Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?”

17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

This verse must be taken in the overall context of Jesus teachings.

Something you seem to not be doing. And it does not need a long context, he asked a direct question and got a direct answer. Let's look at a little context...

Matthew 10

5 These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans. 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’

Jesus did not for a moment fall into the presupposition of human goodness.

You need to review Matthew 25 a little closer.

Matthew 25

31 “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. 33 And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; 36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? 38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? 39 Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’

41 “Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; 43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’

44 “Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ 45 Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

"

Good actions" "Godly character," righteousness was never something man could do or live out apart from the Spirit.

What? Do you mean live with out sin? Of course not. We are born under a curse because of Adam. He is not talking about that. He is talking to Israel and explaining what they need to do to inherit their earthly promise.

If we could then the Old Covenant which consisted of men not born of the Spirit

You are lost "theologically". John 3 is not salvation for the Body of Christ. It is resurrection of Israel. Yes, salvation has to come first and the Body of Christ has it already. There is overlap, same foundation different good news.

 

[Shasta]

the plan was for Jews to repent then take their gospel to the rest of the world , that did not happen so Jesus turned to Saul the destroyer of the church taught him directly rather than learn from the 12.

agree ?








Mat 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithes of mint and dill and cummin, and you have left undone the weightier matters of the Law, judgment, mercy, and faith. You ought to have done these and not to leave the other undone.

I do not think Jesus came to teach the correct doctrines of tithing. He said it was their obligation under the law to do so but He was using it to contrast their neglect of substantive matters which are those eternal principles about God and man's relationship to Him. Turning this into an exhortation to tithe misses the point. Jesus acknowledged the law but He went deeper to deal with issues of the heart.

 

[way 2 go]

I agree. The Jews should have done that. It would have been a place of honor for them to do so. We might have had less error if we had stayed in touch with our Jewish roots. Who knows? Man has the ability to choose. He would have gathered them but "they would not."
However, God has a way of making things work out even better despite the rebellion of his chosen.

if the Jews had not been not cut off they would have received their
kingdom , then 1000 yr reign ...

and we would not be here.

Jer 18:9-10

Saul was the perfect instrument by background, training and temperament to lead the way in bringing the gospel to the Gentiles. I do not look at it as God having no choice but to turn to Saul. Saul, like Israel could have refused. Instead he was "not obedient to the heavenly vision"

Saul-
killer of Christians , a Pharisee zealous for the law (hated gentiles)

Jesus showed Saul grace so Paul could teach us grace apart from the law

Peter and the others continued with the Jews and occasionally with Gentiles in the book of Acts. Historically as the ratio of Gentiles to Jews increased in the Churches they would have ministered increasingly to mixed groups. Thus we see Peter, as well as Apollos and Paul ministering to the mixed congregation at Corinth.

i know Peter ate with gentiles

Act 10:14-15
Peter had the bad news broken to him in that verse Jews were no
longer Gods exalted people ,now we are all the same ,saved by faith,
apart from the law of circumcision {btw bad news = no kingdom}

Israel was cast away when Saul was chosen
Rom 11:15 Act 9:6

It is not inappropriate for Jesus to tell that what they ought to have done. However as always He redirected their attention to deeper more significant issues. Those matters - judgment, mercy and faith are "weightier" because they emanate from the character of God. This has not changed. God is just and merciful and our proper response to Him is still to put our faith in Him. As for tithing, that was a part of the Mosaic system designed to provide support for the Levites, priests, temple and the poor. Now that Old Covenant has passed away God's dwelling is within man and the High Priest ministers intercedes for us in the heavens.

Mat 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithes of mint and dill and cummin, and you have left undone the weightier matters of the Law, judgment, mercy, and faith. You ought to have done these and not to leave the other undone.

Jesus wanted Israel to not be hypocrites

 

[intojoy]

Did I get this wrong?

Light mouse

But there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Greeks also, preaching the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number that believed turned unto the Lord. And the report concerning them came to the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas as far as Antioch:

And he went forth to Tarsus to seek for Saul; and when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that even for a whole year they were gathered together with the church, and taught much people, and that the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. (*Acts‬ *11‬:*20-22, 25-26‬ ASV)

 

[Lighthouse]

I do not think Jesus came to teach the correct doctrines of tithing. He said it was their obligation under the law to do so but He was using it to contrast their neglect of substantive matters which are those eternal principles about God and man's relationship to Him. Turning this into an exhortation to tithe misses the point. Jesus acknowledged the law but He went deeper to deal with issues of the heart.

:bang:

No one is saying this was an exhortation to tithe; it is simply being pointed out that Jesus affirmed the keeping of the law.

 

[Lighthouse]

Did I get this wrong?

Light mouse

But there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Greeks also, preaching the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number that believed turned unto the Lord. And the report concerning them came to the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas as far as Antioch:

And he went forth to Tarsus to seek for Saul; and when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that even for a whole year they were gathered together with the church, and taught much people, and that the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. (*Acts‬ *11‬:*20-22, 25-26‬ ASV)

What of it?

 

[intojoy]

Peter went to join Paul at Antioch after Acts 15

If that is debatable then why did barny also relapse? He had been with Paul long enough right?

 

[Lighthouse]

Peter went to join Paul at Antioch after Acts 15

If that is debatable then why did barny also relapse? He had been with Paul long enough right?

I didn't say you were wrong about anything. I asked where you got the idea for the amount of time between events.

 

[intojoy]

What of it?

Obviously barn was sent to find paul

 

[intojoy]

I didn't say you were wrong about anything. I asked where you got the idea for the amount of time between events.

Googled Paul and his timeline of events and looked for evidence in Acts

 

[Lighthouse]

Obviously barn was sent to find paul

OK. And?

Googled Paul and his timeline of events and looked for evidence in Acts

Where are the verses to show the timeline?

 

[intojoy]

OK. And?


Where are the verses to show the timeline?

I'll get on that..

And?

If barn was sent to Paul by James and company then Paul would have understood that the Jerusalem church had the same gospel.

The issue was about the means of sanctification not salvation.

The question was do we have to submit ourselves to the 613 laws in order to live out the Christian life. Circumcision was the means of submission to the law and if we had to be circumcised to follow Christ then the Judaizers could begin to enslave believers under the entire Law which was controlled by the Pharisees giving the Pharisees control of this sect of Judaism - the Nazarenes .

 

[Lighthouse]

If barn was sent to Paul by James and company then Paul would have understood that the Jerusalem church had the same gospel.

Non sequitur.

The issue was about the means of sanctification not salvation.

The question was do we have to submit ourselves to the 613 laws in order to live out the Christian life. Circumcision was the means of submission to the law and if we had to be circumcised to follow Christ then the Judaizers could begin to enslave believers under the entire Law which was controlled by the Pharisees giving the Pharisees control of this sect of Judaism - the Nazarenes .

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[Shasta]

=Nick M;4022719]16 Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?”

17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

This seeker, a good man by human standards, came wanting to know what good deed he could perform in order to inherit eternal life. This was indeed a very direct inquiry albeit one that rested on a lot of misconceptions. Jesus first remark "no one is good but God" must have been rather startling to a man who apparently believed in human goodness. Even Jesus' elaboration "keep the commandments" offers some problems for if no one but God is truly good how was this man to obey all the commands? Obviously the man was not satisfied with this answer either. Finally, Jesus told him to give up everything and follow Him. The man did not want to make Jesus Lord because he had a lot of stuff. Had he trusted Jesus to meet his needs, or had he believed in who Jesus was he might have done so. Actually when the moment was there he could have, however, when Jesus called him to take that step of faith but the man would not. Giving up his possessions would not have been a meritorious works the kind of "good deed." he had been looking for. It would have been a surrender to Christ. I see this whole encounter as a series of strategic moves designed to bring him out of his self-righteousness and into the obedience of faith.

I am sure the man was talking about eternal life in the World to Come but no one will even enjoy that by merely keeping the commands. Jesus made that clear when talking to another Jew, also a good man. This was Nicodemus. In that dialogue Jesus said

3...“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” He added with two "truly's" to the statement that "unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God (John 3:1-6).

Would Jesus tell the first man he could obey the law and inherit the World to Come and tell Nicodemus has to experience something impossible to get there? It was not about something he could do but something so fundamental and spiritual that it must be done to him (with his consent). He must be born again by the Holy Spirit. Just as Jesus did not explain every detail to the first man's direct inquiry so He offered Nicodemus only the mysterious metaphor of the wind and its movements (John 3:7-8) . Since neither man was born of the Spirit Jesus took each from where they were.

Jesus did not always give "direct answers" as you have suggested. When he told people to drink his blood and eat his flesh he did not bother to explain it. Often He spoke in parables. Privately he explained them to the disciples but not always. This is why you have to take His teachings not only in the immediate situational context but in light of His total message.

Something you seem to not be doing. And it does not need a long context, he asked a direct question and got a direct answer. Let's look at a little context...

Matthew 10

5 These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans. 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’

This was a short focused mission trip. After they went out they came back and reported. Later, however, Philip the Evangelist went and preached in Samaria. There was a revival and Peter, John, followed to bring teaching. As for the admonition to avoid Gentiles and focus only on Jews the Spirit pushed Peter into preaching to the Gentiles later in Acts. The phrase "to the Jew first" is found in many places in the NT, including Paul's writings (Acts 13:46). Because God had made the promises to Israel they were allowed to hear the message first. Though Paul was devoted to ministering to the Gentiles his custom from immediately after his conversion (Acts 9:20-22) until even as far along as Acts 17:1-3 was to preach in the synagogues whenever he entered a new city.

Much has been said about Peter and Paul's "agreement" to focus on Jews and Gentiles respectively. Some have said they were surprised that the apostles "broke" the agreement almost so quickly. The apostles probably would have been surprised to know that they had made such a rigid and formalized contract. It seems more likely that they were describing their ministries in general not absolute terms.

You need to review Matthew 25 a little closer.

Matthew 25

31 “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. 33 And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; 36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? 38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? 39 Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’

41 “Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; 43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’

44 “Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ 45 Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

I am always glad to study a scripture again. This is obviously the judgement that takes place at the Second Coming when the Kingdom of Heaven come down and Jesus rules over the nations. This view, Chialism, was the belief of the earliest Church Fathers as well. As to how you are going to interpret it I have no idea. Personally I expect to among those in attendance just as Paul said in 2 Corinthians 5:10. There I will receive whatever reward or punishment I deserve based upon what I have done during my life on earth.

What? Do you mean live with out sin? Of course not. We are born under a curse because of Adam. He is not talking about that. He is talking to Israel and explaining what they need to do to inherit their earthly promise.

If you are saying that Jesus remarks about life are only about the resurrection (physical immortality) then I disagree. Old Covenant saints who lived and died before Jesus will come back alive and reign but no one will get into that Kingdom without being born of the Spirit. That is exactly what Jesus said.

You are lost "theologically". John 3 is not salvation for the Body of Christ. It is resurrection of Israel. Yes, salvation has to come first and the Body of Christ has it already. There is overlap, same foundation different good news.

When the Spirit moved inside the human Spirit we become alive spiritually. This was what the prophets said would happen (Ezekiel 26:36-37, Jeremiah 31:31-34, Isaiah 59:21). These scriptures form the prophetic basis for understanding the new birth, the in infilling of the Spirit, the atonement and the new walk with Christ.

There is a connection between being alive (spiritually) now and being raised up in the resurrection to immortality. John 6:40"For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

So when we "behold" the Son and believe we have life (present tense) AND in the last day (the future) we will receive resurrection life. Just as there is a direct correlation between current spiritual death and the Second Death of damnation so there is between current Spiritual life and eventual immortality (Romans 8:10-11). The "first fruits of the Spirit causes us to long for the resurrection (Romans 8:23-25)

 

[Shasta]

:bang:

No one is saying this was an exhortation to tithe; it is simply being pointed out that Jesus affirmed the keeping of the law.

I agree He did affirm the law (Gal 4:4). He told them that they "ought to have tithed." My point was that He always taught the essence not the letter. In the New Covenant the essence, or righteous intent of the moral law is fulfilled by our dependence upon the Spirit who moves inside and writes the Law on our heart and minds. Jesus did not teach like the rabbis which is why His teachings are unique and have always been accepted as relevant and imperative since the earliest centuries of the Church. That being said the Mosaic Covenant is over now. Christ ended it and fulfilled it when He made a new one.

 

[intojoy]

I agree He did affirm the law (Gal 4:4). He told them that they "ought to have tithed." My point was that He always taught the essence not the letter. In the New Covenant the essence, or righteous intent of the moral law is fulfilled by our dependence upon the Spirit who moves inside and writes the Law on our heart and minds. Jesus did not teach like the rabbis which is why His teachings are unique and have always been accepted as relevant and imperative since the earliest centuries of the Church. That being said the Mosaic Covenant is over now. Christ ended it and fulfilled it when He made a new one.

The New Covenant of Jeremiah 31?