The author ends up in a ditch of his own by the end of the piece. He acknowledges that Jesus spoke in the context of the Law, to those under the Law. Why is he applying those teachings to those who are not under it (Christians)?
I also find it strange that he assumes most who call themselves Christians would be in agreement with the rich young ruler. Aren’t Christians, by definition, those who have realized they’re lost sinners and cried out to God and put their faith in Jesus by believing the good news? How does such a person think they’re “good”?
After one is saved, they can rest in the goodness of Christ, being clothed in Him. Works that God accepts can flow from this acceptance (and should), but remove that acceptance and you’re back under the law with the author of this piece, talking about “compliance with the Gospel” and threatening eternal consequences for non-compliance. “The man who does these things shall live by them” is the righteousness that is by the Law. Not faith.
These men build their teaching from the synoptic gospels and letters written primarily to Jews. Why don’t they build it from the 13 (14?) letters Paul wrote primarily for Gentiles, where the risen Lord CONTINUED TO TEACH? “My gospel”, Paul called it.
Why don’t they build it from the 13 (14?) letters Paul wrote primarily for Gentiles, where the risen Lord CONTINUED TO TEACH? “My gospel”, Paul called it.