canadyjd
Well-Known Member
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?
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?