What is the difference between Cornelius and the rich young ruler?

[Alan Gross]

What is the difference between Cornelius and the rich young ruler?

The same difference as between Abel and Cain (if the rich young ruler was not eventually saved, as Cain was not, which I don't know).

If God choses someone for salvation based on their good works, What’s the difference between the two?

Trick question! God does not chose anyone for salvation based on their good works.

1. Jews and Gentiles to different standards regarding choosing for salvation. Trick! The only 'standard' God had for chosing any soul is His Own Good Pleasure, Eternal Love, and Infinite MERCY, based on no condition, whatsoever (how you say?...your country?? "Unconditionally"? Right.) Then, all souls, in the Old Testament and New Testament are saved by Repentance toward God and Faith in the Promised Messiah that they looked forward to, or us looking back at Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection.
2. God requires rich people to give all their wealth to the poor. No way. No works of any kind could possibly earn or gain or "buy God" or Heaven/ Eternal Life.
3. God chose Cornelius for salvation according to God's Own Perfect Will and not by Cornelius' good works.

God chose and saved Cornelius, prior to his offering of a more excellent sacrifice (reference to Abel who brought a blood sacrifice picturing the life of the flesh is in the blood and Jesus' future sacrifice of Himself.) Cornelius' sacrifices and offerings were what was Commanded of saved Jews. He was not necessarily aware Jesus, His Promised Messiah and Sacrificial Lamb of God, had come, in Person. God answered Cornelius' prayers, when He does so only for the saved. God does not hear the 'prayers' of the wicked.
On the other hand, we do not know if God Unconditionally chose the rich young ruler to ultimately save him and only that he was trying to find out what additional work(s) he may need to DO, to assure himself a home in Heaven ( and possibly, the ability to do a miracle or two?). Jesus dealt with him, as God did with Cain, and caused Cain's countenance to be fallen, by working on his countenance and emotions (Cain was wroth and the rich young ruler, sad) and on both conscience, of course, with the Law.

Jesus was taking the rich young ruler to Mt. Sinai and the Law (as we need to do with lost sinner's, i.e., Jesus having my sins nail Him to the cross is SERIOUS JUDGMENT OF SIN PUNISHED BY THE LAW PICTURED), before Jesus "took him to Calvary".

What more is Calvary to a lost soul than a man dying with a beard, UNLESS THEY HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE OF THEIR OWN PERSONAL SIN AND NEED OF JESUS WORK ON CALVARY?

Jesus wasn't looking for someone to "believe His story", He was probing a lost soul's heart and dependence on their self effort and presumed ability to keep the Law (as with Cain's works of the cursed ground he brought for his 'offering', which indicated he did not have a saved heart right with God, to bring a blood offering that exalted Jesus.)

By the Law of God, God let Cain know and Jesus let the rich young ruler know, and we need to assist the Holy Spirit with God's Word to show the lost, "you...are...NOT...God..."

In other words, they Have Not and Can Not ever dream of keeping the whole Law of God (from conception? Perfectly?)

Only Jesus Could and Did do that.

The only Perfect person Who ever lived was Jesus.

Johnny Cochran knew that much. Lay that on them to ponder.

God RUNS HEAVEN, I tell them. And no one's telling God to move over, they are coming in, are they?

God reasoned with Cain as Jesus did with the rich young ruler OVER THEIR SIN.

Lost sinner's are to Repent of something. How about their SIN?

AND TRUST JESUS TO SAVE THEM.

FROM WHAT? THEIR SIN.

Is SIN a part of your soul-winning?

It needs to be, according to the Triune GODHEAD, doesn't it?

 

[JD731]

In the thread concerning Cornelius (Acts 10), some are arguing that God chose Cornelius and his household for salvation based on his good works which were pleasing to God. Synergism.

However, Matthew 19 and Luke 18, we have the similar account of a rich young man who asked Jesus, “what good thing must I do” for eternal life?

Jesus tells him to keep the commandments, which he claims to have done since his youth.

Jesus tells him he only lacks 1 thing, telling him to give all his wealth to the poor and follow Him.

Jesus never contradicts the man’s claims of keeping all the commandments since his youth. In fact, he says he only lacked 1 thing.

My question is, why did God accept the good works of Cornelius and chose him for salvation, but reject this young man’s good works, setting a different standard for eternal life… namely giving away his wealth?

The rich ruler and Cornelius were on two exactly opposite playing fields. One was under the OT Law of Moses and the other was under the blessings of the gospel of Christ. One was a Jew with covenant promises and the other a gentile without promises of salvation.

In the case of the ruler, Jesus merely revealed to him what his god truly was whom he worshipped by revealing his heart.

 

[JD731]

Im not suggesting you are throwing rocks… that would be most unchristian of you. Rather, I was stating that using the term “Calvinism” could be used as a slur to one’s theological stance and that’s wrong.

I myself could be considered a Calvinist because I hold to Doctrines of Grace however I do not consider myself one anymore than I consider myself Roman Catholic for believing in the Trinity. A person who labels one that way misses the bigger picture.

I consider anyone a Reformed Calvinist who believes and teaches the TULIP, since that doctrine was the fruit of the Protestant Reformation. The mother of the Protestant Church is Catholic and all the reformers came from her.

 

[tyndale1946]

I consider anyone a Reformed Calvinist who believes and teaches the TULIP, since that doctrine was the fruit of the Protestant Reformation. The mother of the Protestant Church is Catholic and all the reformers came from her.

We can say what we want to about Cornelius and The Rich Young Ruler but I won't make such a quick judgement... Its not our criteria, did have to save any of us?... Its God criteria and I will leave it there... He saves by Grace and Mercy... His in the Salvation business not any of us... Brother Glen

 

[canadyjd]

The rich ruler and Cornelius were on two exactly opposite playing fields. One was under the OT Law of Moses and the other was under the blessings of the gospel of Christ. One was a Jew with covenant promises and the other a gentile without promises of salvation.

In the case of the ruler, Jesus merely revealed to him what his god truly was whom he worshipped by revealing his heart.

Cornelius was a “god fearer” which is a technical term to refer to gentiles that worshipped according to the OT Law. He was in the same circumstance as the RYR in that sense.

And both were pointed to Jesus as the way to eternal life.

peace to you

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

F

I consider anyone a Reformed Calvinist who believes and teaches the TULIP, since that doctrine was the fruit of the Protestant Reformation. The mother of the Protestant Church is Catholic and all the reformers came from her.

So have you ever actually been a Catholic, or a Presbyterian… how about Dutch Reformed? If so, then you’d know that there are vast differences. The reformed rejected much of the tradition & dogma of Roman Catholism while keeping their love for Christ which is central to Christianity.

I firmly believe that there are honorable Christ loving believing Christian’s in almost every church and it behooves us to be there for them to guide and lead them to a clearer understanding of God. TULIP is a systematic way to understanding how God is working in our lives so I embrace it… clearly it is far better than RC church traditions and jumping the seven sacraments of their church and the replacement of the Holy Ghost in favor of Mary the Virgin Mother.

 

[MB]

I don’t believe that “giving always comes back to us”, certainly not in this life where wealth always passes away.

It works for me I have no idea why it doesn't work for you. I'm a long ways from being wealthy.Yet I give to those in need.

I do think God moves first, but the rich young ruler stood in the presence of Jesus Christ and was specifically told what he must do to inherit life. Cornelius was given no such command.

No doubt the RYR was a big “giver”. He was generous with his wealth, but he still lacked one thing.

Why did Jesus tell him, first, to keep the commandments?

Peace to you

I did not see where the RYR was generous at all. Rather I saw that he loved his money to much to give it all away.He seems to think to highly of his money to just give it away and follow Christ. He must have thouht Jesus wasn't worth it
MB

 

[Alan Gross]

Its not our criteria, did have to save any of us?... Its God criteria and I will leave it there... He saves by Grace and Mercy... His in the Salvation business not any of us..

We see God as giving us "the ministry of reconciliation", bringing the lost into the fold and 'commanding' them to Repent and Believe, etc.

He said His Word was the power of God unto Salvation, when the Holy Spirit bears witness with the Word in working the New Birth in the sinner's heart and soul.

Do you see the preaching of the Gospel as what God uses, instrumentally, to bring a sinner to a Conviction of their sins and need of a Savior?

He was in the same circumstance as the RYR in that sense.

And both were pointed to Jesus as the way to eternal life.

Cornelius was a "devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway."

Whereas the lost have no fear before their eyes, so I see him "that feared God", along the other things said, as him having already known The Lord and His blood as His Savior.

Then, I see Jesus pointing the rich young ruler to the Law and not yet mentioning Himself, as Lord and Savior.
...
I just see Jesus "seeking and saving that which is lost", as a soul needing to be cognisant of their sin by the Law, and Convicted of their guilt and offence toward God 9(and His Universal Moral Law.)

Meaning, I believe a soul needs to be "lost", before they can be "saved" and I thought that is what the rich young ruler story was teaching.

I'm not trying to be disagreeable, this just gives me something to do right now and see if it gets discussed...

 

[canadyjd]

It works for me I have no idea why it doesn't work for you. I'm a long ways from being wealthy.Yet I give to those in need.

I did not see where the RYR was generous at all. Rather I saw that he loved his money to much to give it all away.He seems to think to highly of his money to just give it away and follow Christ. He must have thouht Jesus wasn't worth it
MB

There are commands in the OT Law to tithe, as well as to care for the poor, children and widows. Jesus told him to keep the commandments. He said he had done so his entire life. Jesus did not dispute that claim and said he only lacked one thing.

He was generous with his wealth. I suppose it’s easier to be generous if you are very wealthy.

No doubt he loved his money. More importantly, he didn’t recognize Jesus for who He is.

When he approached Jesus, he said “good teacher”…. Jesus responds, “why do you call me good” God Aline is good.

Instead of recognizing that Jesus was in fact attempting to get him to see that He is God, he drops “good” and continues the conversation.

Concerning your point about getting a return from God on your “giving”, that’s a topic for another thread.

peace to you

 

[JD731]

Definition of the word dispensation; Exemption of a rule or usual requirement.
A system of order, or organization. community, etc., especially as existing at a particular time.
In Christian theology, a divinely ordained order prevailing at a particular time.

Cornelius and his household was the first gentile to be saved and marked the beginning of the dispensation of grace, God having just before this exempted the OT ceremonial; laws, including the law of eating unclean animals. This took place between Peter and God in Acts 10 during the time the gentiles were coming to get Peter to tell the gentile how to be saved and that God is opening the door for them to be saved.

This took place historically in the year 40 AD. The Jews began to be saved in 30 AD. God was saving Jews because he had promised to save them in the OT. He made no such promises to gentiles. Therefore the Jews were being saved under the principle of promise and gentiles, absent promises, were include by God's grace.

One needs to read the whole context of Acts 10 and 11, as well as the context of passages I present below.

Acts 11:
12 And the Spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting. Moreover these six brethren accompanied me, and we entered into the man’s house:
13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;
14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.

I know you men well enough now to know you will not believe the words I just posted right out of the mouth of God. Peter is to tell Cornelius and his house words whereby he and his household will be saved. Most of you will say Cornelius was already saved. You would be wrong and to say it is to call God a liar.

This event with Cornelius is told again by Peter that is was the opening of the door of faith to gentiles.

Ac 14:27 And when they (Paul & Barnabas coming off the first missionary journey) were come, and had gathered the church (in Antioch)) together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles.

1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.

4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.

Now watch what Peter says, remembering that the ceremonial laws have been exempted in order for receiving gentiles and this between Peter and God in Acts 10. When you put Peter's response in this context it is authority of God. Here it is, the last thing he says in the Acts.

7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

This is tremendous for us gentiles. But, sadly, I am guessing there is not a single poster on this forum who understands this and will agree.

 

[JD731]

F
So have you ever actually been a Catholic, or a Presbyterian… how about Dutch Reformed? If so, then you’d know that there are vast differences. The reformed rejected much of the tradition & dogma of Roman Catholism while keeping their love for Christ which is central to Christianity.

I firmly believe that there are honorable Christ loving believing Christian’s in almost every church and it behooves us to be there for them to guide and lead them to a clearer understanding of God. TULIP is a systematic way to understanding how God is working in our lives so I embrace it… clearly it is far better than RC church traditions and jumping the seven sacraments of their church and the replacement of the Holy Ghost in favor of Mary the Virgin Mother.

There is a doctrine that appears in the NT scriptures 42 times. It is "the faith." We would call the faith the fundamentals. One must be in "the faith" to be at peace with God the Father. I did not make that rule, God the Father did.

2Co 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

This last days era of a hundred new Bible translations is a departure from the faith.

1Ti 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

2Ti 4:7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:

 

[canadyjd]

Definition of the word dispensation; Exemption of a rule or usual requirement.
A system of order, or organization. community, etc., especially as existing at a particular time.
In Christian theology, a divinely ordained order prevailing at a particular time.

Cornelius and his household was the first gentile to be saved and marked the beginning of the dispensation of grace, God having just before this exempted the OT ceremonial; laws, including the law of eating unclean animals. This took place between Peter and God in Acts 10 during the time the gentiles were coming to get Peter to tell the gentile how to be saved and that God is opening the door for them to be saved.

This took place historically in the year 40 AD. The Jews began to be saved in 30 AD. God was saving Jews because he had promised to save them in the OT. He made no such promises to gentiles. Therefore the Jews were being saved under the principle of promise and gentiles, absent promises, were include by God's grace.

One needs to read the whole context of Acts 10 and 11, as well as the context of passages I present below.

Acts 11:
12 And the Spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting. Moreover these six brethren accompanied me, and we entered into the man’s house:
13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;
14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.

I know you men well enough now to know you will not believe the words I just posted right out of the mouth of God. Peter is to tell Cornelius and his house words whereby he and his household will be saved. Most of you will say Cornelius was already saved. You would be wrong and to say it is to call God a liar.

This event with Cornelius is told again by Peter that is was the opening of the door of faith to gentiles.

Ac 14:27 And when they (Paul & Barnabas coming off the first missionary journey) were come, and had gathered the church (in Antioch)) together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles.

1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.

4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.

Now watch what Peter says, remembering that the ceremonial laws have been exempted in order for receiving gentiles and this between Peter and God in Acts 10. When you put Peter's response in this context it is authority of God. Here it is, the last thing he says in the Acts.

7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

This is tremendous for us gentiles. But, sadly, I am guessing there is not a single poster on this forum who understands this and will agree.

I understand you believe the difference is that the RYR and Cornelius were in two separate “dispensations.”

I disagree and I would rather this thread not be hijacked into a discussion about dispensationalism.

peace to you

 

[JD731]

I understand you believe the difference is that the RYR and Cornelius were in two separate “dispensations.”

I disagree and I would rather this thread not be hijacked into a discussion about dispensationalism.

peace to you

Let me paraphrase your statement to me. “Don’t confuse us with the facts.”

Between the rich young Jewish ruler and the Italian Cornelius were at least 11 years and the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.Surely you would agree that the cross of Jesus Christ at least clarified what it takes to be saved.

The contention has not changed. There is nothing new under the sun. The argument between the Jews and Paul that I quoted above from Acts 15:1 is essentially the argument between us now. The cross was not entirely sufficient to save but something in addition was required. The opposers of the cross always speak about who cannot be saved while the true preachers of the gospel speak about those who can.

The whole economy of God changed when Jesus rose from the dead, even the covenant of God.


Galatians 3:22-25
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise (the Spirit of Life)by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Make the application to the two men under discussion.

 

[canadyjd]

Definition of the word dispensation;….

Cornelius and his household was the first gentile to be saved and marked the beginning of the dispensation of grace, ….

Cornelius….. Acts 10:

Ethiopian Eunuch…. Acts 8

Your view that Cornelius was the first Gentile convert and began the dispensation of grace is not supported by scripture.

Everyone that has ever been saved was saved by God’s grace.

peace to you

 

[Alan Gross]

John the Baptist.

 

[JD731]

Cornelius….. Acts 10:

Ethiopian Eunuch…. Acts 8

Your view that Cornelius was the first Gentile convert and began the dispensation of grace is not supported by scripture.

Everyone that has ever been saved was saved by God’s grace.

peace to you

This is total nonsense. It misrepresents the word of God and it fits with the philosophy of 2 Peter 2 and the epistle of Jude.

The apostle Paul claimed that the dispensation of grace was given to him personally. This is not what you claim for the apostle Paul, therefore you and the apostle Paul are at odds in your theology. You essentially deny what the apostle Paul says.

Paul (Saul) was not an apostle during the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ. He was not a member of the twelve apostolic band either before the cross or after the cross. He was especially chosen to be an apostle after the rejection of the Spirit of God and the killing of Stephan in Acts 7 by the Jewish government in Jerusalem, which took place seven years after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Until this time no gentile had ever been preached to by these apostles and none had ever been born again of the Spirit. The gospel of Jesus Christ went to the Jew first and then to the gentiles. When Peter was sent to the gentiles for the first time in Acts 10 and the band of twelve, who were in Jerusalem at the time, heard of it they were horrified and contended with Peter.

Ac 11:1 And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God.
2 And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him,
3 Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.

One of the men, a member of the twelve, would much later write these words.

Jn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

It is obvious he did not understand them in Acts 11. From this I gather it is not a deal breaker to be ignorant but it is a deal breaker to remain ignorance once the light hits your eyes.

So, why did God commission a special apostle who was not of the other group of apostles? Do we know? Are we told? The answers are yes. Indeed we are told. Pay attention to what Paul says and understand that God sent him to Arabia for the revelation he is giving in this epistle. God taught him this mystery that heretofore had not been made known.

Eph 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

(read the cause in chapter 2)

2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.
8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,
11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:
12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.
13 Wherefore I desire that ye faint not at my tribulations for you, which is your glory.

If Paul was given this grace and he was not even saved until 7 years after the realities of the gospel, the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, how say you men that God was saving men by grace before it was a dispensation of God? The scriptures make it sure that God was giving the Spirit to the Jews because of his promise to them before Jesus came .No such promise was given to gentiles. Salvation to gentiles was by grace, and since that time, also to the Jews.

7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. (by grace)

It is not okay to ignore the context and content of the word of God and teach things contrary to what it says like most of you men here do.

 

[canadyjd]

This is total nonsense. It misrepresents the word of God and it fits with the philosophy of 2 Peter 2 and the epistle of Jude.

The apostle Paul claimed that the dispensation of grace was given to him personally. This is not what you claim for the apostle Paul, therefore you and the apostle Paul are at odds in your theology. You essentially deny what the apostle Paul says.

Paul (Saul) was not an apostle during the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ. He was not a member of the twelve apostolic band either before the cross or after the cross. He was especially chosen to be an apostle after the rejection of the Spirit of God and the killing of Stephan in Acts 7 by the Jewish government in Jerusalem, which took place seven years after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Until this time no gentile had ever been preached to by these apostles and none had ever been born again of the Spirit. The gospel of Jesus Christ went to the Jew first and then to the gentiles. When Peter was sent to the gentiles for the first time in Acts 10 and the band of twelve, who were in Jerusalem at the time, heard of it they were horrified and contended with Peter.

Ac 11:1 And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God.
2 And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him,
3 Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.

One of the men, a member of the twelve, would much later write these words.

Jn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

It is obvious he did not understand them in Acts 11. From this I gather it is not a deal breaker to be ignorant but it is a deal breaker to remain ignorance once the light hits your eyes.

So, why did God commission a special apostle who was not of the other group of apostles? Do we know? Are we told? The answers are yes. Indeed we are told. Pay attention to what Paul says and understand that God sent him to Arabia for the revelation he is giving in this epistle. God taught him this mystery that heretofore had not been made known.

Eph 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

(read the cause in chapter 2)

2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.
8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,
11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:
12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.
13 Wherefore I desire that ye faint not at my tribulations for you, which is your glory.

If Paul was given this grace and he was not even saved until 7 years after the realities of the gospel, the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, how say you men that God was saving men by grace before it was a dispensation of God? The scriptures make it sure that God was giving the Spirit to the Jews because of his promise to them before Jesus came .No such promise was given to gentiles. Salvation to gentiles was by grace, and since that time, also to the Jews.

7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. (by grace)

It is not okay to ignore the context and content of the word of God and teach things contrary to what it says like most of you men here do.

All those words without addressing the obvious.

Cornelius … saved… Acts 10

Ethiopian Eunuch…. saved… Acts 8

Cornelius was not the first Gentile saved.

Your house of dispensational cards collapses under the truth of God’s Word.

Everyone saved through history has been saved by God’s grace.

peace to you

 

[kyredneck]

The question the RYR asked was what good deed must he do to gain eternal life.

That was his FIRST question. His NEXT question:

20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I observed: what lack I yet? Mt 19
21 And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. Mk 10

Christ loved him, He loved His own that was in the world, and He was calling RYR to join the disciples, not to buy his way into 'heaven above'.

After the RYR left, Jesus said it was easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get into heaven.

That is so wrong. The kingdom of God/heaven HERE ON EARTH, not heaven above.

23 And Jesus said unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, It is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through a needle`s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. Mt 19

 

[canadyjd]

That was his FIRST question. His NEXT question:

20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I observed: what lack I yet? Mt 19
21 And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. Mk 10

Christ loved him, He loved His own that was in the world, and He was calling RYR to join the disciples, not to buy his way into 'heaven above'.

That is so wrong. The kingdom of God/heaven HERE ON EARTH, not heaven above.

23 And Jesus said unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, It is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through a needle`s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. Mt 19

So, you see a difference between entering the kingdom of heaven/God on earth and entering the kingdom of heaven/God in heaven?

That seems unlikely to me, but I’ll think about it.

I agree with you that Jesus wasn’t telling him to give his money to the poor to be saved, but rather, get rid of that which prevented him from following Jesus.

peace to you

 

[JD731]

All those words without addressing the obvious.

Cornelius … saved… Acts 10

Ethiopian Eunuch…. saved… Acts 8

Cornelius was not the first Gentile saved.

Your house of dispensational cards collapses under the truth of God’s Word.

Everyone saved through history has been saved by God’s grace.

peace to you

One thing you do not need for your religion is a Bible because you cannot make any sense from it. If Paul was given the grace of God like he said he was in Eph 3:2 and other places, why don't you believe him? It is because an intelligent person like you goes brain dead when you open the scriptures but transpose the doctrines of some heretic denier of the faith who has written books that makes the words of the scriptures senseless.

Cornelius and his household were the first gentiles saved if receiving the Holy Spirit into the mortal body by faith defines salvation from the penalty of sin, which is the second death in the lake of fire, and it does.

The Spirit of God was not poured out on the gentiles when Phillip went down to Gaza to preach to the Ethiopian. Nothing was said about the Spirit of God in Acts 8. Neither the Ethiopian or Phillip said he received the Holy Ghost. The man said "I believe Jesus Christ is the son of God." That was enough to justify him as it did every person who believed in Jesus Christ in the gospel accounts. Men can and did believe in Jesus before the Holy Ghost was poured out upon them from above.

Now, here is what Peter said in his testimony to the skeptics in Jerusalem regarding Cornelius and his gentile house;

Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

In the defense and testimony in Jerusalem, he said this:

11 And, behold, immediately there were three men already come unto the house where I was, sent from Caesarea unto me.
12 And the Spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting. Moreover these six brethren accompanied me, and we entered into the man’s house:
13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;
14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.
15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us (Jews) at the beginning.


16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as [he did] unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

NOTE this is the baptism of the gentiles with the Holy Ghost, simply meaning that God had poured out the Holy Spirit from heaven in such abundance that now all gentiles could open their mouths and drink him in. This was not true in Acts 8 when Phillip, who BTW, had no commission from God to give the Holy Ghost to anyone as proven by this witness to the Samaritans earlier, whom he baptized in water as was commanded the circumcision in the beginning but whom had to wait for the apostles to give the Spirit. See John 20 for this apostolic commission.


18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

Again, a few years later in the same city of Jerusalem, Peter would say this about the event with Cornelius;

Ac 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

Now, the question for you is, had you rather believe the apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ or the heretical writers of bad and false doctrine that twists the words of their scriptures?

I urge you to believe the sensible historical narrative in words that will correct your error.