"What must I do to be saved", what did Jesus mean?

[MasterYourLife]

Actually this is where translations make a difference..

Matthew 19: KJV
16 "¶ And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?"

The guy had a Works salvation mindset.. Asking what Good thing he could Do to secure eternal life from Himself.. Jesus response can only be understood if we know that Jesus was going to go through a process to cause the guy to understand he was not going to achieve eternal life by doing some good deeds..

Jesus went through the Law to convict the man that he failed the Law but the guy thought he had kept the Law without fault ( which is delusional ) So Jesus established in the guys mind that he Must be Perfect to attain eternal life for himself.. And the guy walked away with great sorrow because he could not be perfect..

Matthew 19: KJV
20 "The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? {21} Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. {22} But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions."

But even in the above passage Jesus indicated the Way one could have eternal life when He said to the man "come and follow me". Only followers of the LORD Jesus Christ will be saved..

So there is no way a person can attain entry into eternity with God by their own deeds because all human beings are incapable of perfection.. After the young man walked away in sorrow the apostles where also devastated because they too understood how they where unable to be perfect.. Jesus then replied to them as follows..

Matthew 19: KJV
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."

Jesus was pointing to the Way we imperfect human beings where going to be saved.. Not by the good things we humans will do but by the Good thing the Perfect LORD Jesus was soon to do on the cross..

Yes I understand that. But it's not answering the question.
My OP wasn't about doing good deeds for salvation.

It's why didn't Jesus in those interactions, mention baptism of the Spirit and water, and eating/drinking flesh/blood.

Your first point explains half of the context of the verse, but as you mentioned, Jesus still goes on to say, "follow me", which surpasses the context of deeds for salvation.

 

[Guojing]

Still a weak argument. Let's agree for a second that Jesus only came for the Jews. How would anything He said change for a gentile, especially for a gentile who converts to a Jew?
The message of Jesus doesn't change with Paul. If you were a gentile in that day, how would you be saved? Would you have to wait for Paul to be born?
Jews were supposed to be a light to the world. If they were a light, what light would the show the gentiles? The light of Jesus and His teachings? Or would they say, "you're a jew, go to Jesus", or "you're a gentile go to Paul"?

I already stated in my first reply to you

In time past: Gentiles could only be saved as a Jew, meaning they have to be willing to be circumcised and under the Law of Moses (Exodus 12:48). There was no other way a Gentile can be saved.

You don't have to wait for Paul, but without the mystery of the grace dispensation revealed to him by the ascended Christ, you have to follow the Law of Moses, in addition to believing in Jesus.

So I am actually agreeing with you. A Gentile before Paul must live like a Jew in order to be saved. He will be saved as part of the Jewish nation (Genesis 17:14). But that was in time past.

But now there is no other gospel to be saved, other than the gospel of grace revealed to Paul. You will be subjected to a double curse (Galatians 1:9) if you were to still hold on to the gospel being preached from Matt-John.

 

[Adstar]

Yes I understand that. But it's not answering the question.
My OP wasn't about doing good deeds for salvation.

It's why didn't Jesus in those interactions, mention baptism of the Spirit and water, and eating/drinking flesh/blood.

Because he had not yet established the age of grace and the recieving of the Holy Spirit.. This came about AFTER He died on the cross.. Not before.. Also Jesus hinted at the Way of salvation twice during the interaction first by including the ""Come follow me"" and later stating that with men it is impossible but with God ALL things are possible..

Your first point explains half of the context of the verse, but as you mentioned, Jesus still goes on to say, "follow me", which surpasses the context of deeds for salvation.

Thats because Jesus was first Convicting the man.. There is a process involved before a person comes to salvation and that process starts when the person is made to understand that they cannot save themselves..... This conviction convinces the person that they are doomed and cannot save themselves.. That's when the person in the process of being saved is introduced to the Gospel Way of being saved by Jesus through trusting in the Atonement for sins Jesus secured by His death on the cross..

The Law never saved anyone.. The Law's purpose was to show men that they where all guilty / condemned by the Law. That everyone fell short of the perfection needed to be acceptable in Gods perfect eternal existence.. Read the following passage carefully..

Romans 3: KJV
19 "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. {20} Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. {21} But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; {22} Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:"

 

[ForestGreenCook]

When the rich man came to Jesus and asked, "what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?"

Why was the answer to salvation:
- Keep the commandments
- Follow Jesus

Also, when Jesus visited Zacchaeus and he repented. Jesus said, "today salvation has come to this house".
Why was the answer essentially, "keep the commandments", in response to salvation.

Not an acceptable answer: they were Jewish and had a different means to salvation.

Why? Because before Jesus died on the cross, he gave different answers to Nicodemus and His disciples (also Jewish).
Which were:
- "No one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit"
- "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you."

Why are the answers to salvation inconsistent, unless they are all synonymous or expressed in different ways.

Salvation, according to Strong's Greek interpretation means "a deliverance". Were are delivered eternally by God's grace, without the help of man. The eternally delivered people are delivered (not eternally because that is secured) but as they sojourn here in this world by following God's commandments and repenting when they commit sins.

 

[Nehemiah6]

When the rich man came to Jesus and asked, "what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?" Why was the answer to salvation: - Keep the commandments - Follow Jesus

Did you notice that word *INHERIT*? Here was an unsaved man laboring under the delusion that he could actually inherit eternal life. But the Bible makes it clearly that no man can inherit eternal life. Why? Because it is purely A GIFT OF THE GRACE OF GOD based upon the finished work of Christ (Rom 6:23).

Jesus knew what was in this man's heart -- that the rich young ruler thought that he could earn salvation by keeping the commandments. But you will notice that Jesus was testing him by mentioning only the commandments which related to his relationship with others.

But Jesus did not mention the first three commandments, which relate to God. Why? Because this man's god was his wealth. So Jesus commanded him to forsake his wealth and follow Christ. Had this man been keeping ALL the commandments, he would not have made wealth his god and his idol. But since he refused to follow Christ, we know that he did not keep all the commandments. But even if he could have obeyed them all perfectly throughout his life, he still would not have earned or inherited eternal life.

 

[MasterYourLife]

A lot of hyper-grace on this forum.

Those claiming Paul had a separate message from Jesus are deluding themselves. If the preaching of Jesus was only for Jews, then you can tear those pages out, because they don't apply to you and this age. Jesus came for the Jews, but He accepted gentiles who came to Him.

Grace saves, but without faith and works, grace won't save you. The purpose of holiness remains from the beginning of time and until the earth is destroyed.
Those who are anti-first4gospels should read through James... "by works faith was made perfect".

 

[Guojing]

A lot of hyper-grace on this forum.

Those claiming Paul had a separate message from Jesus are deluding themselves. If the preaching of Jesus was only for Jews, then you can tear those pages out, because they don't apply to you and this age. Jesus came for the Jews, but He accepted gentiles who came to Him.

Grace saves, but without faith and works, grace won't save you. The purpose of holiness remains from the beginning of time and until the earth is destroyed.
Those who are anti-first4gospels should read through James... "by works faith was made perfect".

You don’t tear the pages of the ot out even though, since genesis 12, God was only in covenant with the Jews and speaking only to the Jews throughout right?

So that point is a red herring. But if it’s the first time u r hearing this, it’s understandable.

Many churches preach almost exclusively from the 4 gospels so to them, it’s heretical to believe that Jesus was not speaking to the gentiles during his time on earth.

 

[ForestGreenCook]

When the rich man came to Jesus and asked, "what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?"

Why was the answer to salvation:
- Keep the commandments
- Follow Jesus

Also, when Jesus visited Zacchaeus and he repented. Jesus said, "today salvation has come to this house".
Why was the answer essentially, "keep the commandments", in response to salvation.

Not an acceptable answer: they were Jewish and had a different means to salvation.

Why? Because before Jesus died on the cross, he gave different answers to Nicodemus and His disciples (also Jewish).
Which were:
- "No one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit"
- "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you."

Why are the answers to salvation inconsistent, unless they are all synonymous or expressed in different ways.

Please give me scripture references to your statement examples.

 

[ForestGreenCook]

Did you notice that word *INHERIT*? Here was an unsaved man laboring under the delusion that he could actually inherit eternal life. But the Bible makes it clearly that no man can inherit eternal life. Why? Because it is purely A GIFT OF THE GRACE OF GOD based upon the finished work of Christ (Rom 6:23).

Jesus knew what was in this man's heart -- that the rich young ruler thought that he could earn salvation by keeping the commandments. But you will notice that Jesus was testing him by mentioning only the commandments which related to his relationship with others.

But Jesus did not mention the first three commandments, which relate to God. Why? Because this man's god was his wealth. So Jesus commanded him to forsake his wealth and follow Christ. Had this man been keeping ALL the commandments, he would not have made wealth his god and his idol. But since he refused to follow Christ, we know that he did not keep all the commandments. But even if he could have obeyed them all perfectly throughout his life, he still would not have earned or inherited eternal life.

You say that no man can inherit eternal life. Have you considered Matt 19:29, 29:34,

 

[MasterYourLife]

You say that no man can inherit eternal life. Have you considered Matt 19:29, 29:34,

I think he means, we can't get saved by our works unless we have grace.

 

[MasterYourLife]

You don’t tear the pages of the ot out even though, since genesis 12, God was only in covenant with the Jews and speaking only to the Jews throughout right?

So that point is a red herring. But if it’s the first time u r hearing this, it’s understandable.

Many churches preach almost exclusively from the 4 gospels so to them, it’s heretical to believe that Jesus was not speaking to the gentiles during his time on earth.

In other words you're saying, you don't have to follow anything Jesus said. Only what Paul said.
Or are you picking and choosing what Jesus said, when you feel it applies to you?

 

[Guojing]

In other words you're saying, you don't have to follow anything Jesus said. Only what Paul said.
Or are you picking and choosing what Jesus said, when you feel it applies to you?

No, you do learn a lot of principles about God from the OT correct?

But when you read about God commanding the Jews to be circumcised or else they will be cut off from him (Genesis 17:14), you know it is not directed TO you.

Likewise, it may be tough for you to accept if you are hearing this for the first time, some of the things Jesus told the Jews to follow were under the Law of Moses, which was still valid during the 4 Gospels. But it won't apply to you now.

It is written FOR your learning, just like the OT. It is just not written TO you.

 

[MasterYourLife]

No, you do learn a lot of principles about God from the OT correct?

But when you read about God commanding the Jews to be circumcised or else they will be cut off from him (Genesis 17:14), you know it is not directed TO you.

Likewise, it may be tough for you to accept if you are hearing this for the first time, some of the things Jesus told the Jews to follow were under the Law of Moses, which was still valid during the 4 Gospels. But it won't apply to you now.

It is written FOR your learning, just like the OT. It is just not written TO you.

Yea there were dietary, clothing laws, etc. That was the old covenant. Jesus came to teach the new covenant.
"This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood." (who is "you"? The Jews only?)
But this topic was about salvation. You're claiming "follow Me and keep the commandments" was only for the Jews.

Yet again, Jesus also taught those same Jewish people, about faith, obedience, baptism, etc.,...everything that Paul said.
The Jew first, then gentile. There is no only Jew and only Gentile.
"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
The Jews if they obeyed God, would simply be the delivers of Jesus's message to the gentiles. They would teach us exactly what Jesus taught them. Which is what Paul did.

Ironic to tell people to follow Paul instead of Jesus, yet Jesus was the one who taught Paul everything he knew.
This isn't about me hearing this for the first time, I've heard it before.
But enough about my opinion, let's hear what Jesus says about your opinion.

"Therefore go and make disciples of ALL NATIONS, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey EVERYTHING I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

 

[John146]

Ironic to tell people to follow Paul instead of Jesus, yet Jesus was the one who taught Paul everything he knew.

Yes, because what the Lord taught Paul was something new, if not, He could have had Peter or another Apostle teach him.

 

[Guojing]

Yea there were dietary, clothing laws, etc. That was the old covenant. Jesus came to teach the new covenant.
"This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood." (who is "you"? The Jews only?)
But this topic was about salvation. You're claiming "follow Me and keep the commandments" was only for the Jews.

Yet again, Jesus also taught those same Jewish people, about faith, obedience, baptism, etc.,...everything that Paul said.
The Jew first, then gentile. There is no only Jew and only Gentile.
"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
The Jews if they obeyed God, would simply be the delivers of Jesus's message to the gentiles. They would teach us exactly what Jesus taught them. Which is what Paul did.

Ironic to tell people to follow Paul instead of Jesus, yet Jesus was the one who taught Paul everything he knew.
This isn't about me hearing this for the first time, I've heard it before.
But enough about my opinion, let's hear what Jesus says about your opinion.

"Therefore go and make disciples of ALL NATIONS, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey EVERYTHING I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

Yep, well said, I agree with you there. As I have mentioned in another thread:

The most interesting discovery when you read the scripture on your own is, not only the resurrected Christ NOT tell the 11 that the law of Moses is nailed to the cross, he continue to tell them in the Matthew version of the great commission, to teach all to obey everything he had commanded them. And yes, he commanded them to follow the law of Moses too in Matthew 5.

You are totally right. The idea that the law of Moses was done away with, immediately after he has died and resurrected, is not scriptural. It is a result of people reading Paul into the 4 gospels.

 

[Guojing]

Yes, because what the Lord taught Paul was something new, if not, He could have had Peter or another Apostle teach him.

Yes, a careful reading of Paul's account in Galatians 1 also pointed this out

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

God himself did not want Paul to learn from the 12, those who were with Jesus in the flesh.

He led him to Arabia, which was also where Mount Sinai was located, where Moses receive the Law from God. And in those 3 years, God revealed to him all those secrets that he has kept hidden since the world began (Ephesians 3:9), secrets that Peter himself found it difficult to understand. 2 Peter 3:16

So it cannot be the same gospel of the kingdom that the 12 were preaching in the 4 Gospels.

 

[MasterYourLife]

Yep, well said, I agree with you there. As I have mentioned in another thread:

The most interesting discovery when you read the scripture on your own is, not only the resurrected Christ NOT tell the 11 that the law of Moses is nailed to the cross, he continue to tell them in the Matthew version of the great commission, to teach all to obey everything he had commanded them. And yes, he commanded them to follow the law of Moses too in Matthew 5.

You are totally right. The idea that the law of Moses was done away with, immediately after he has died and resurrected, is not scriptural. It is a result of people reading Paul into the 4 gospels.

"Go preach everything I have commanded you, but stop preaching after I die and resurrect, because the message won't be necessary after that, I'll just tell Paul everything instead".
Jesus spent His entire life teaching a message that would be done away with right after He dies. Yea, your logic definitely makes sense.

I think you've deluded yourself to the point you don't know what you believe.

 

[Guojing]

"Go preach everything I have commanded you, but stop preaching after I die and resurrect, because the message won't be necessary after that, I'll just tell Paul everything instead".
Jesus spent His entire life teaching a message that would be done away with right after He dies. Yea, your logic definitely makes sense.

I think you've deluded yourself to the point you don't know what you believe.

I understand why you will find this tough to accept at first. You must understand the significance of Stephen being stoned in Acts 7, how God finally revealed the secret mystery thru the Apostle Paul. As I have wrote elsewhere:

Paul explained it well in Romans 11

11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

God deliberately made it easy for us former Gentiles to be saved, because the Jews kept rejecting God, in order to provoke the Jews to jealousy.

The Jews rejected God the Father in the OT by ignoring or stoning their prophets.
The Jews rejected God the Son in the 4 Gospels by putting him on the cross.
The Jews rejected God the Holy Spirit in Acts by stoning Stephen who was full of the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:55).

With the entire Trinity being rejected by the Jews, the last one to me is blaspheming against the Holy Spirit, which is an unforgivable sin under the Law of Moses, God finally unveiled his hidden plan to save the Gentiles independent of the Jews, a plan he had kept hidden since the world began (Ephesians 3:9).

Once you realized this, Ephesians 2 and 3 take on totally new meaning, and you as a former Gentile, will really praise God the Father for his wonderful plan. And you will not be upset that Jesus was only speaking to the Jews in the 4 Gospels.

 

[MasterYourLife]

Yes, a careful reading of Paul's account in Galatians 1 also pointed this out

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

God himself did not want Paul to learn from the 12, those who were with Jesus in the flesh.

He led him to Arabia, which was also where Mount Sinai was located, where Moses receive the Law from God. And in those 3 years, God revealed to him all those secrets that he has kept hidden since the world began (Ephesians 3:9), secrets that Peter himself found it difficult to understand. 2 Peter 3:16

So it cannot be the same gospel of the kingdom that the 12 were preaching in the 4 Gospels.

Yea definitely a great tactic by Jesus.
Create 2 separate messages for 2 separate people, but have both messages taught to all nations.
If your best argument is that Paul didn't go to Jerusalem, and having to stitch verses together, you should re-consider what you've been brainwashed into.

 

[MessageOfTheCross]

Just a reminder: Romans 2:16 - The Apostle Paul says that everyone will be judge according to his Gospel, i.e., The Message of the Cross, i.e., Christ and Him Crucified!

“In the day when God shall Judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ (lays to rest any idea that Judgment will be on any other basis; while many other things, such as conscience, may be a witness, still Jesus Alone is the criteria) according to my Gospel (Jesus Christ and Him crucified).”

JSM