it's the same here, as with the rich young ruler who came to Christ and called him 'good teacher' -- asking what he must "do" to inherit life.
Jesus tells him, 'no one is good but God' -- and he's supposed to put 2 + 2 and realize that he's not talking to a rabbi, but to God Himself in human flesh.
he does not make this connection, tho, during their conversation - so he does not have faith, and is instructed the same way anyone without faith is. remember in Exodus 16, the sabbath is first given in order to test the Israelites, whether they will obey the LORD or not - and they fail. some are still gathering more manna then they are supposed to, trying to keep it longer, etc. and so they come to Sinai and are given a covenant of law -- vis-a-vis, "line upon line, precept upon precept, so that they may go, and fall backward, be broken, and snared, and taken:" because He said to them, here is rest, but they would not hear ((re: Isaiah 28)).
they make a covenant with death, but it shall not stand.
yet can that rich young ruler be saved? Jesus tells him he lacks something, and gives him a command nowhere found in Torah - to sell everything and give it to the poor. Jesus is not giving him Torah: Torah is what this rich young man showed up with, boasting of, all the while knowing within himself that it was insufficient to grant life: and so he came to Christ, tho he did not know Who it was he spoke with.
the disciples see this and marvel, thinking who in the world can be saved? Jesus says, with man it is impossible ((blowing up the inheritance of life by keeping that ministration engraved on stones)) but with God, all things are possible.
all things.
including the possibility that this rich man went home and the truth dawned on him one day, and he believed. he did, after all, go away sad: and there is a great inference to be made from that fact - why was he sad?
Jesus tells him, 'no one is good but God' -- and he's supposed to put 2 + 2 and realize that he's not talking to a rabbi, but to God Himself in human flesh.
he does not make this connection, tho, during their conversation - so he does not have faith, and is instructed the same way anyone without faith is. remember in Exodus 16, the sabbath is first given in order to test the Israelites, whether they will obey the LORD or not - and they fail. some are still gathering more manna then they are supposed to, trying to keep it longer, etc. and so they come to Sinai and are given a covenant of law -- vis-a-vis, "line upon line, precept upon precept, so that they may go, and fall backward, be broken, and snared, and taken:" because He said to them, here is rest, but they would not hear ((re: Isaiah 28)).
they make a covenant with death, but it shall not stand.
yet can that rich young ruler be saved? Jesus tells him he lacks something, and gives him a command nowhere found in Torah - to sell everything and give it to the poor. Jesus is not giving him Torah: Torah is what this rich young man showed up with, boasting of, all the while knowing within himself that it was insufficient to grant life: and so he came to Christ, tho he did not know Who it was he spoke with.
the disciples see this and marvel, thinking who in the world can be saved? Jesus says, with man it is impossible ((blowing up the inheritance of life by keeping that ministration engraved on stones)) but with God, all things are possible.
all things.
including the possibility that this rich man went home and the truth dawned on him one day, and he believed. he did, after all, go away sad: and there is a great inference to be made from that fact - why was he sad?
Can we agree that this same GOD, by the power of HIS Word, stablished "points" For HIS GOOD PLEASURE, in HIS Eternal Kingdom, that are referred to as earth/heaven ages?
Can we agree that "by the POWER of HIS WORD", that during the course, of "one", aka this current earth/heaven age, HE would send a SAVIOR in flesh? This same Jesus of Nazareth? aka "The word, made flesh." Can we agree on this?
Can we agree that Melchizadek, was also a flesh man? That he, being a Priest of the Most High GOD! That he (how can I say) "FOUNDED" (BY GOD'S GOOD PLEASURE) this SAME NAMED "order of Melchizadek", To which this SAME Jesus of Nazareth, was "elevated" ABOVE his fellow (priests), to be SENT to be born of flesh, by this SAME "GOD of ALL AGES?" Can we agree on this?
And because of Jesus's OBEDIENCE per GOD'S instructions, after being baptised by John. God stated "THIS DAY!" "HAVE I BEGOTTEN THEE!" This SAME Jesus of Nazareth! Can we agree on this?
Then, can we agree that the "spirit of TRUTH", mistakenly referred to as the "Spirit of God", and/or "the gift of the Holy Spirit", which leads us unto ALL TRUTH. Is "LIMITED" by the faith of the believer him/herself, into WHAT, and HOW MUCH TRUTH, it is ABLE to "guide" one UNTO? Can we agree on this?
Can we agree that due to one's "lack" of faith, that Jesus HAD to return TO the Father, so as the Father WOULD SEND "another comforter", (expressly) BECAUSE the "guiding" of one unto ALL TRUTH, can be pretty "deceiving/seducing", UNTIL (a) PROPER DISCIPLINE is learned? Can we agree on this?
Can we then agree, that "limited TRUTH", is/are the reason/s why Jesus would say: "if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not."
I WANT you to agree with me, that I, am not Christ! Nope! Not am! Don't WANNA be! NOT GONNA be!
Nor, am I God! Don't WANNA be! NOT GONNA BE!
I am QUITE content on GOD being GOD! And, as EQUALLY content on Christ being the "ONLY WAY" TO the Father! Of which I TRULY believe, and confess!
Just testifying to the"sadness" I see in how many believers sell themselves so short, when it comes to that which transpires after one is "confessed" by Jesus, TO the Father!