Case closed! The OP has been answered. GOD the Father sent Jesus into the world to die in vain. "What does it mean to deny Jesus."?
I disagree. To deny Jesus is to deny his message and/or to deny that his message was inspired.
Matt.5:17-18, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. "
Oryonder, that law Jesus was referring to was the Sacrificial/Ceremonial laws concerning the services rendered in the "worldly sanctuary" and were patterned after the Heavenly one which Moses was shown.
Finally you have addressed the scripture in question .. Thank you.
Jesus was not referring to "only" sacrifical laws. In fact, the examples Jesus gives have zero to do with anything sacrificial and I do not think Jesus cared to much about these things as evidenced by his statement " It matters not what goes into the mouth but what comes out"
Whether Jesus included "sacrificial laws" is not known. What we know for sure if one believes these words came from Jesus .. is that he is speaking of works and deeds .. not belief in any kind of "blood sacrifice" as you suggest.
Jesus gives examples of what he means right after Matt 18 and it is not what you claim
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven
He is talking about all the laws and then he gives more specific examples.
21 You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, You shall not murder,[
a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment. 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[
b][
c] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, Raca,[
d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, You fool! will be in danger of the fire of hell.
25 Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. .
Deeds, deeds .. and more deeds .. works and more works. Zero about any blood sacrifice.
I do not know where you are getting this "blood sacrifice" idea from bacause it clearly is not the only thing nor the main thing Jesus is referring to.
(Heb.9:1) Jesus showed the fulfillment to the Disciples in Luke24:27, 44-48. Continue on in that understanding with Heb. 9+10.
Hebrews is written by Paul and it is my contention that Paul contradicts Jesus so I do not know why you would bring it up.
Luke 24:27 does not help us at all and 44-48 "while compelling" says nothing about blood sacrifice as a requirement for salvation.
I would also be willing to bet that 44-48 was a later insertion (note that it is almost the last passage of the last Chapter in Luke which should ring alarm bells). It really does not matter however because it is not given as a requirement for salvation and even if it did would still contradict Jesus and James.
Human sacrifices were never permitted by GOD by Mankind. When the Israelites back-slide and followed after the gods of the surrounding nations---they followed those nations abominations which GOD despised/condemned.
It is quite amazing how much human sacrifice was done in the name of El-Yahweh.
I do not know why you would bring this up in relation to the Topic however so lets drop it unless you can connect the dots.
Had HIS TIME FOR THE "FULFILLMENT" COME---WITH THE FIRST MESSAGE OF HIS 3 1/2 TEACHING AND PREPARING HIS DISCIPLES?
The being made right with GOD was seen in those daily and annual Sacrifices. (Which were only for "the time then present". Heb.9:9-10)
Yes .. Paul contradicts Jesus and James .. I get it.
In relation to "save", James has three verses. (1)1:21), "Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls."
(2) (2:14), "What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? "
(3) 5:20), "Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins. "
It is only in the "engrafted word" that all three have relevance.
All the above clearly supports my claim.
"the engrafted/(implanted) word" the message of Jesus which has been given.
It is the message .. and doing what Jesus commands that saves souls.
James states "Lay apart all filthiness and so on" and listen to the message of Jesus. This is about deeds not faith in any blood sacrifice ?
There is no doubt what James is talking about .. no mystery, it is crystal clear and he spends a whole chapter on it. Not some obscure passage that you are trying to make mean something you want it to mean.
James could not be more clear when he asks the very specific question.
"Can faith save him?"
Then after giving further clarification on the use says.
"Faith without works is DEAD"
Prior to discussing the question of "faith" James prefaces "
If ye fulfil the royal law
according to the scripture,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour
as thyself, ye do well:
Do good works .. this is what James is saying and he goes on to give further "transgressions of the law"
And then James talks about " Gods Judgement" James 2:12-13, and that Judgement is by the Law. Zero is said about some requirement for Faith or that Faith will mitigate this Judgement.
In the very next verse however James does talk about Faith. What does he say ?
Faith without works is Dead
And just in case folks did not get it the first time he actually says it twice. (verse 17 and verse 20)
James 2:17 "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead"
And here perhaps he is speaking directly to you my good Sincerely.
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works
is dead?
Notice that James never states that "works without faith is dead"
He does speak about the OT just in case you wanted to claim support from there.
Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when
he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
Abraham, according to James was "justified by works", not by faith.
You then go on to quote a bunch of Pauline material which says the opposite.
Clearly James is speaking against the Pauline ideas that were floating around and just in case folks did not get it the first or second time .. he repeats it a third time after stating how the harlot Rahab was justified by "works"
James 2:26 "faith without works is dead"
3 times in one chapter.
James is in agreement with all those verses. It is you who in denying the blood sacrifice of Jesus are contradicting the whole of the Everlasting Gospel Message and thereby, GOD the FATHER--who sent Jesus for that purpose.
James is not in agreement with the doctrine of salvation by faith .. Period.
He is however in agreement with the message of Jesus and he had faith in the message of Jesus and that Jesus was inspired/sent by God.