Are we still required to follow Mosaic law?

[Gman]

Checkmate 49ers...

[Kurieuo]

KBCid wrote:
"So I would like to see If I can get any of the people here who have been opposing my position to agree completely with one of the two following statements;

1) The free gift of salvation is entirely dependant on faith in Christ and has no dependancy on our active participation in the process.
2) The free gift of salvation is dependant on both faith in Christ along with a dependancy on our active participation in becoming righteous." End of quotation.

Sign me up, big time, as agreeing completely with number 2.

I don't know if I would exactly say that faith it dependent on anything. Rather it seems a description of what faith is alone (what it actually means by itself). As an example if we say that we have faith, but lack the willingness to change course into G-d's direction of righteousness, that would be a dead faith..

I agree with Gman here. I would even go as far as saying that if one claims to have faith in Christ, and truly has absolutely no desire and willingness to follow God's will, then maybe this person doesn't have a saving faith in the true Jesus Christ. Unless, the person continually ignores or disobeys the prompting of the indwelling HS. Which I would have a hard time believing. If one is dead in his sins, then is saved by God's power, then I really couldn't understand how one could ignore the HS.

I noticed a subtle change in your wording Gman. Careful G, once you turn to the too far towards grace, you could get turned on and eaten. If you're unaware to what changed in your words, then that could be a good thing.

So looks like we both (RickD and I) can agree with Gman on something in this discussion.

[RickD]

Kurieuo wrote:
So looks like we both (RickD and I) can agree with Gman on something in this discussion.

K, I bet if I understood Gman a little better, and if he understood what I'm trying to say, a little better, we'd agree a lot more than it seems here. I really don't think we're as far apart as it seems.

. Careful G, once you turn to the too far towards grace, you could get turned on and eaten. If you're unaware to what changed in your words, then that could be a good thing.

I'm almost tempted to believe the "G" in Gman stands for Grace... Almost.

[Gman]

I noticed a subtle change in your wording Gman. Careful G, once you turn to the too far towards grace, you could get turned on and eaten. If you're unaware to what changed in your words, then that could be a good thing.

So looks like we both (RickD and I) can agree with Gman on something in this discussion.

Of course guys... I don't think we have a disagreement on the central doctrine of salvation. We know that we can't justify ourselves unto salvation by following His commandments. That would just be crazy to say... In fact if I ever said that, someone please put me out of my misery.. I was only merely addressing His instructions in His righteousness which can come in the understanding of His commandments whether it's in the OT or NT. It's certainly not my righteousness.. I would never claim that righteousness would come out of any work I could ever do.. Heaven forbid.

When I come to heaven, I don't think G-d is going to pat me on the back for giving up pork anyway. I don't think He would care about that..

[RickD]

Gman wrote:
When I come to heaven, I don't think G-d is going to pat me on the back for giving up pork anyway. I don't think He would care about that..

G, how come the 180 degree change on this? Is God's grace getting to you?

[Gman]

Gman wrote:
When I come to heaven, I don't think G-d is going to pat me on the back for giving up pork anyway. I don't think He would care about that..

G, how come the 180 degree change on this? Is God's grace getting to you?

LOL.. Yes, I know.. But I'll give it up anyway. Not to impress G-d, because He told me not to. And if He says.. "April fools" then I guess the joke was on me.

[Kurieuo]

I noticed a subtle change in your wording Gman. Careful G, once you turn to the too far towards grace, you could get turned on and eaten. If you're unaware to what changed in your words, then that could be a good thing.

So looks like we both (RickD and I) can agree with Gman on something in this discussion.

Of course guys... I don't think we have a disagreement on the central doctrine of salvation. We know that we can't justify ourselves unto salvation by following His commandments. That would just be crazy to say... In fact if I ever said that, someone please put me out of my misery.. I was only merely addressing His instructions in His righteousness which can come in the understanding of His commandments whether it's in the OT or NT. It's certainly not my righteousness.. I would never claim that righteousness would come out of any work I could ever do.. Heaven forbid.

When I come to heaven, I don't think G-d is going to pat me on the back for giving up pork anyway. I don't think He would care about that..

Previously, I believe instead of your saying:

I don't know if I would exactly say that faith it dependent on anything. Rather it seems a description of what faith is alone (what it actually means by itself). As an example if we say that we have faith, but [lack the willingness to change course into G-d's direction of righteousness], that would be a dead faith..

that you probably would have more said something like:

[Faith without obedience is empty and not really faith in Christ at all]. As an example if we say that we have faith, but [do not obey G-d's law], that would be a dead faith..

The main difference is really where you more carefully say only a "willingness to be to change course towards G-d's direction of righteousness" rather than where you have previously said "obedience to G-d's law" being required.

You don't even mention "the Law" or "God's Law" at all -- which isn't really necessary if God's righteousness and Law are of the same accord anyway.

Seems like something so little, but it makes all the difference in my own reading and obviously Rick's.

[Wolfgang]

If I am wrong about law keeping, I feel quite confident that I will still be saved since over-righteousness is not sinful. So I win, either way. That's what I want, security. Eternal life with Jesus is far too valuable to "blow."

[Gman]

that you probably would have more said something like:

[Faith without obedience is empty and not really faith in Christ at all]. As an example if we say that we have faith, but [do not obey G-d's law], that would be a dead faith..

The main difference is really where you more carefully say only a "willingness to be to change course towards G-d's direction of righteousness" rather than where you have previously said "obedience to G-d's law" being required.

You don't even mention "the Law" or "God's Law" at all -- which isn't really necessary if God's righteousness and Law are of the same accord anyway.

Seems like something so little, but it makes all the difference in my own reading and obviously Rick's.

Hmmm, I don't see the disconnect.. Let's put it this way.. Obviously the Holy Spirit would be in the believer directing that person in righteousness.. However, G-d working through the Holy Spirit in His prophets also wrote down for us all the commandments of G-d. Therefore that would be another reason for following His commandments.. Or you could say the Holy Spirit in us prompting us to obey His commandments written in the Bible.

When I say "faith" it's more than just saying I believe. Sure we believe.... But faith is also an action...

Makes sense?

[Gman]

If I am wrong about law keeping, I feel quite confident that I will still be saved since over-righteousness is not sinful. So I win, either way. That's what I want, security. Eternal life with Jesus is far too valuable to "blow."

As long as we understand that it is His righteousness, I don't see a problem in that. I certainly don't see a problem in wanting to obey as long as we don't become the object of that obedience. Also I would question what we should be obeying too..

[Wolfgang]

What we should be obeying? Well, it's easy to know what we should not be obeying, which are the offerings and sacrifices and Levitical priesthood, abolished in the book of Hebrews, and circumcision annulled in the book of Acts. People resurrected in the second resurrection will be judged (translation: expected to obey, according to some theologians) "by the things written in the books," or the Bible, which most likely, it seems, would be the remaining, un-abolished laws in the Bible. So maybe we need also to obey those remaining, un-abolished laws.

[Gman]

What we should be obeying? Well, it's easy to know what we should not be obeying, which are the offerings and sacrifices and Levitical priesthood, abolished in the book of Hebrews, and circumcision annulled in the book of Acts. People resurrected in the second resurrection will be judged (translation: expected to obey, according to some theologians) "by the things written in the books," or the Bible, which most likely, it seems, would be the remaining, un-abolished laws in the Bible. So maybe we need also to obey those remaining, un-abolished laws.

Yes, animal sacrifice is done away with but not sacrifice itself since Christ is doing that now for us.. Animal sacrifice however will be returning during the millennial reign of Yeshua (Christ) from Jerusalem Ezekiel 40:41, Ezekiel 44:11, but not in place of Christ's atoning work. Also we should keep in mind that both physical circumcision and circumcision of the heart will be necessary for anyone entering the Sanctuary during the millennial reign of Yeshua as recorded in Ezekiel 44:9. So it's not exactly done away with yet.

[Kurieuo]

Not to smudge our previous agreement, but I promised to turn my attention to James, and now I do.

To borrow your analogy of the horticulturalist. It is God who is the Master Horticulturalist. The Holy Spirit who cultivates and tends to us. A tree can't prune and water itself, and a garden can't weed itself. Not sure if you intended your analogy to be extended that far? But it seems good to me.

However G-d created Adam and Eve to be stewards of the earth Genesis 2:15, therefore pruning is required.. And the Holy Spirit will tell us where to prune. And it makes sense too that G-d would give us freedom to either work it or not.. So you could argue that G-d is the Master Horticulturalist, which I think is true also... However, do we ever listen to the Master Horticulturalist? I would say no, but G-d's grace saves us from His wrath.

Don't get me wrong... I would love to sit on a couch all day and do nothing for G-d too and get His approval... I would love G-d to wave a magic wand and call me righteousness just for calling His name out and picking my nose, I just think it's deeper than that. Sometimes we need to follow the Horticulturalist's manual too.

That's all...

And yet, we can do nothing to gain God's approval. Whether we pain or please God is something else though.

For example, I love my kids because they're mine. They don't necessarily please me all the time, and while I may not approve of what they always do; I most definitely approve of them and love them regardless. If me, being a human being can do this and God is the ultimate source of such love, than how much higher is God's love to my own? Surely God can afford me infinitely more grace, than I do my own children whether they're wilfully disobedient or not.

Thankfully, Christ is the method that allows God's love to win alongside God's righteousness. And so we only need to respond to Christ.

I always thought James said it best..

James 2:17-24, “Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, ‘You have faith, and I have works.’ Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, ‘Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.’ And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.”

I sincerely would like us to find agreement. As such, I'm going to first focus on where we do agree in my understanding of your beliefs when you use this passage in James.

I agree that faith without works is dead. However, I'm sure every one who has responded to Christ has had change. It might be they still pick their nose, but you're right it is deeper than that. Because when a person sincerely responds to Christ, they do so from their heart -- the core of their very soul and being.

Such works might be evidenced in a desire to read the Bible, a new-found desire to pray to and/or worship God, even as simple as posting on boards like this one to defend Christianity. All these are "works" that reveal one's faith. On the other hand, it would make no sense at all for someone to respond to Christ from their very soul, only to then criticise Him in discussions with others and continue in thought and deed as before.

(1) I have personally witnessed some who have come to Christ during an alter call, only to thereafter be exactly the same person they were prior. Even actively mocking Christianity, displaying an unchanged state and complete misunderstanding of Jesus in labelling Him the God that failed due to his being executed. This is a "dead faith". No transformation happened whatsoever to this person. No seed take root, even though the person responded to an alter call.

That is certainly a "faith without works" that is dead. So my, and now doubt Rick, strongly agree that a faith in Christ without a desire to change, and in fact change, is dead. It is meaningless, not because the lack of works nullify the faith, but because the "faith" is shown to have not existed in the first place.

From here, I now wish to pay respect to James more fully starting at James 1:12:

• 12 Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has [m]been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him. 13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted [n]by God”; for God cannot be tempted [o]by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. 15 Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin [p]is accomplished, it brings forth death. 16 Do not be [q]deceived, my beloved brethren. 17 Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or [r]shifting shadow. 18 In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we would be a kind of first fruits [t]among His creatures.

Those who respond to Christ and love Him have been promised eternal life (v12 - "the crown of life"). We can expect to suffer all sorts of temptation in our lives -- we may win some, we may loose some -- but what matters is our love for Christ. It is based on this that we will be saved from God's righteousness which otherwise demands our own "death" for our sins.

Now we were brought forward (saved) by the word of truth (v18), which could be identified as Christ since He is said to be the Word made Flesh (John 1). With this we can move to the next passage.

• 19 This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; 20 for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God. 21 Therefore, putting aside all filthiness and all [v]that remains of wickedness, in [w]humility receive the word implanted, which is able to save your souls. 22 But prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves. 23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his [x]natural face in a mirror; 24 for once he has looked at himself and gone away, [y]he has immediately forgotten what kind of person he was. 25 But one who looks intently at the perfect law, the law of liberty, and abides by it, not having become a forgetful hearer but [z]an effectual doer, this man will be blessed in [aa]what he does.

In Romans 1:18, Paul writes that the "the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness." Because of their denial of "the truth" aka the "word of truth" (James 1:18) aka Christ: "God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, [v]haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them." (Romans 1:28-32)

James 1:19 talks of hearing the truth, but to hear it we must cast our wickedness aside. All the anger and the desire to lash out with our own words must be tamed, and we must be ready to hear the truth. So as we place aside our wickedness spoken of in Romans 1, including our anger against God and hate-filled tongue that stops us being receptive of the truth (James 1:19-21) -- all that remains is to in humility accept the Word of Truth that is able to save us (v.21). The words, "in humility" convey our being saved is not to do with our own works; for if it was, then we have nothing to be humble about. Rather, James in here conveying that "being saved" is all to do here with God's work -- the word of truth (Christ) implanted within us (v21) -- which saves our souls.

In verses 22-24, we come across the difference between someone who truly loves Christ, and someone who doesn't. That is, the person I made previous mention of in this post [paragraph beginning with (1) above] -- the person who responded to an alter call and did not change at all. Compared with the person who truly responds to Christ and is transformed, such that their actions now pay tribute to their belief in varying ways (whether they start reading the Bible, love praying or worshipping God, perhaps begins to defend Christ in online discussions like these, begin trying to understand and obey the Mosaic Law, becoming circumcised because they believe that's a Christian thing to do, or some other personal way). The fact is, what they do is predicated -- built upon -- their love for Christ; such that they would not have acted in such a way if they were not transformed in their love for God.

Now in verse 25, we have a conclusion of this passage. The person "who looks intently at the perfect law, the law of liberty, and abides by it..." Notice here the words "law of liberty". What is this law? James is making an important distinction here from the law. Rather, the law that sets us free is based on the the word we receive in humility -- the Word of Truth (v17) -- Christ (John 14:6). We are promised freedom, the "crown of life" if "we love Him [Christ]" (v.12). This law, is none other than to love God (James 1:12). Whoever abides in loving God, not simply hearing the words but being affected by a heart change -- these will be blessed in their loving actions.

Yet, James does not want to just leave it at loving God. He also wants to tap into the second greatest commandment, which James begins emphasising the importance of:

• 26 If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not [ab]bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless. 27 Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained [ac]by the world.

Here James is stressing the importance of loving in deed, rather than mere words. Words should be bridled with action. If someone is starving, it isn't enough to say, "God bless you, and may your belly be fill." No, give them the food they need for heavens sake. Words here are meaningless without action.

So too words are not enough for the truly religious (e.g., those who proclaim to love Christ). Rather, the ideal for those who love Christ is to help others out of love and be holy. That's right, I believe in grace, but I also believe one should remain holy and do their best to follow Christ. James clearly emphasises both here and it makes good sense to when loving others, as such love can become tragically misdirected and wrong.

For example, let's say a woman sells themselves on the street to make a living. It makes no sense in your helping them to then sleep with them and defile the love and help you were giving. We see the biggest staining happening in the media where say a Priest, paster or chaplain started desiring to help out of love, only to then be stained by sexual immorality. Remain pure in helping, yet keep yourself clean from staining the love you set out to give, thereby destroying your representation of Christ's love.

• James 2:1-7 - 1 My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. 2 For if a man comes into your [a]assembly with a gold ring and dressed in fine clothes, and there also comes in a poor man in dirty clothes, 3 and you [c]pay special attention to the one who is wearing the fine clothes, and say, “You sit here in a good place,” and you say to the poor man, “You stand over there, or sit down by my footstool,” 4 have you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil [d]motives? 5 Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor [e]of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? 6 But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you and [f]personally drag you into [g]court? 7 Do they not blaspheme the fair name [h]by which you have been called?

James now elaborates further on loving others, through focusing on an issue of favouritism shown in the church towards those who look well off compared to those who are poor and dirty.

Something supposedly good -- gathering together to love and worship God -- is being stained through creating distinctions of persons in Christ based on material wealth (a worldly value), and as such dishonouring the poor. Yet, James points out God chose the poor of the world to be rich in faith and heirs of Christ's kingdom promised to ALL who love Him. Next, James points out that the rich tend to be more taken by the world, dragging others to court over personal matters (rather than simply forgiving and loving their neighbour or going the extra mile). Here James is doing a role reversal, saying the poor are often rich in spirit, while the rich are poor in spirit. Not always the case, yet James is trying to make his point on what is important really hit home with his listeners.

• 8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. 9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the [j]law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole [k]law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not commit murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the [l]law. 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. 13 For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy [m]triumphs over judgment.

Now James more explicitly makes mention of Christ's second commandment to "love your neighbor as yourself" -- applying it to the case of favouritism James identified in the church. There was no law that prohibited showing partiality and favouritism, however James points out that in their showing partiality, they have transgressed all the law. This is revealing.

It shows the commandment to love your neighbour is not something prescribed, as the Law was prescribed to Moses and Israel by God. It isn't something set in stone, that you simply obey or don't obey. No, it is of the heart. Rather than giving your coat because it might be commanded, you give the person on the street two coats out of love if you really have their well-being at heart. This is the "Law of Love" of which Christ spoke. The 10 Commandments are built upon the Law of Love. It goes beyond the 10 Commandments. It goes beyond the Torah. God desires change in our very being -- love itself to be written our hearts.

James again mentions the "law of liberty" (2:12). As identified earlier in James 1, this law is to love God. We now have loving God including loving each other. As Christ says in Matthew 25:40, "I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me." So to love Christ also includes a love for one's brothers. Thus, those who showed favouritism and dishonoured the poorer brethren were dishonouring Christ Himself. Thus, they broke the "law of liberty" that James previously spoke of which is to do with loving God.

This passage ends with James emphasising that we should "speak and act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty" -- the law of loving God and others.

• 14 What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can [n]that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, [o]be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? 17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is [p]dead, being by itself.

Here, James uses an example to make his point that faith without works is dead. The example is one of a brother or sister needing clothing and food. If you just wish them well, but do not give them what they need, then your love is empty. Likewise, your love for God without any works is dead.

If you say you love God and yet you remain as you, then that's a dead love. Your faith too is dead [refer to the paragraph starting with (1) above]. Call it what you like, but you can't possibly have a love for God and then remain unchanged. Some change is going to happen. It's really inevitable.

However, to those reading who might become dismayed at this, don't be dismayed. If you are dismayed then that's a good sign because it likely shows you want to love God, and in fact do love God.

God doesn't expect someone starting with 1 talent to produce the same amount as someone starting with 10 as much. We each come to God at different stages in life. You no doubt have fruits being produced that even you are not aware to. They will produce themselves in time.

Understand this. Our works might justify our love for God to outsiders and those who don't know us. However, we can know we love God intimately and intuitively.

For example, we love our kids because we know we love them with/without looking to any of our works. So too we can know we love God with/without works. We have a private access to our selves that noone else except God has.

However, obviously some evidence that we love our kids/God ought to follow. It's just a natural progression that it should. And we'll strive to do what is best for our kids. Likewise with God, even if we know we fail, such will hopefully drive us to try harder. And with God's nurturing we'll grow.

• 18 But someone [q]may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” 19 You believe that [r]God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? 22 You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was [t]perfected; 23 and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness,” and he was called the friend of God.

And here is the remaining part of the passage Gman quoted.

If we love God, then we'll strive to love God and others. There will be change within us when we truly respond to Christ.

Rest assured, you can also be secure in such change without looking to your works, for as previously mentioned, each of us has private access to ourselves - our feelings, thoughts and heart.

Now if you water a plant in good soil, it'll sprout. It can't not.

Consider God the Sun, Christ the soil, the Holy Spirit as the water and our heart the roots of the plant. God beams down upon us, planting us in Christ. With the watering of the Holy Spirit, all we need to do is open our hearts and soak up His love. A natural change is going to happen and we'll flower. This flowering is easier said than normally happens though.

A plant often has much growing to do before it flowers or produces fruit. In addition, unless properly protected and tendered to, the weather and world around the plant can destroy it. We too can be tossed around and put through much turbulence in life. But the One who looks after us is faithful. As Paul writes in Romans 8:

• 37 But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

That's where I'll end my commentary.

To save anyone "work" responding (KBCid), if anyone wants to debate anything I've said, know that I'm not going to be drawn into debate from here-on. So feel free to rip into my words if you disagree -- just don't expect a response back.

What I believe should be apparent to all, and hopefully what I've written has helped to join up both sides of this discussion. If you agree, then great. If not, fine. But I promised I'd comment on James (since it's often used by those who emphasise works), and that I did.

[Kurieuo]

that you probably would have more said something like:

[Faith without obedience is empty and not really faith in Christ at all]. As an example if we say that we have faith, but [do not obey G-d's law], that would be a dead faith..

The main difference is really where you more carefully say only a "willingness to be to change course towards G-d's direction of righteousness" rather than where you have previously said "obedience to G-d's law" being required.

You don't even mention "the Law" or "God's Law" at all -- which isn't really necessary if God's righteousness and Law are of the same accord anyway.

Seems like something so little, but it makes all the difference in my own reading and obviously Rick's.

Hmmm, I don't see the disconnect.. Let's put it this way.. Obviously the Holy Spirit would be in the believer directing that person in righteousness.. However, G-d working through the Holy Spirit in His prophets also wrote down for us all the commandments of G-d. Therefore that would be another reason for following His commandments.. Or you could say the Holy Spirit in us prompting us to obey His commandments written in the Bible.

When I say "faith" it's more than just saying I believe. Sure we believe.... But faith is also an action...

Makes sense?

Yes, I just wish we could sit down over a glass or two to discuss the matter.

Words used often miscommunicate or cause reaction. Sometimes one can accentuated the opposite to try bring balance where they see imbalance, and I think this often happens in discussions like these.

Being able to discuss in person, can more often than not settle a dispute. Since clarifications can always be made, and we can even correct ourselves as we go. Whereas with posts like this, it's like you've got one shot to say something, and not only do you have to say it correctly, you have to ensure you say it in a way that will be read correctly also. Very tricky to do.

In any case, read my last post. You'll find some "faith" and "action" in there.

[Wolfgang]

Gman, Revelation 20:5,11,12: "...... 12 ..... and the dead were judged ....... by the things which were written in the books." The Greek for "books" refers to the books of the Bible. "Things" seemingly would be laws in the Bible. Verse 5's "This is the first resurrection" refers to the previous discussion of the resurrection immediately occurring when Jesus returns. Verse 11 discusses the second resurrection, although the Bible does not call it the second resurrection directly. Apparently the dietary, festival, tithing, Sabbath laws, New Testament marital and divorce laws (those marital laws are the tough ones to obey), etc. are major laws the dead, or newly resurrected, will need to obey, it seems.