What do you have to know to be saved?

[lillypie82]

Stumbled across this blog post today and wondered what you guys thought of it. http://rachelheldevans.com/caleb-wilde-guest-post/

I know the members here range widely on the inclusivism/exclusivism scale... I'm creeping further toward inclusivism the more I read, though, so I really enjoyed this article. I still think Jesus is the only way, but not sure that "The Romans Road" is the only way to trust him. (There's a C.S. Lewis quote along those lines, but I can't remember the exact wording at the moment.)

P.S. this topic has probably been discussed before, I just wanted to share this specific article.

[Don]

I agree with most of what that article says actually.
I am not so much an inclusivist as I am willing to rely on the sovereignty of God.

If you have the opportunity I highly recommend Mimosa: A True Story by Amy Carmichael.
http://www.amazon.com/Mimosa-True-Story-...087508821X

This story was a catalyst in my journey away from the Romans road and the Sinner's Prayer approach to evangelism. (I know that this comment is going to get hammered but I stand by it....) So long as salvation is based on a perceived choice between good and evil, heaven or hell then it will produce false converts and I believe is the very reason Matthew 7:21-23 is in Scripture. In the Mimosa story she had only heard of God during a short visit to a rescue orphanage ran by Amy Charmichael. The story is how she returned to her village and how God dealt with her and how she trusted this God she had only heard of and how he blessed her.

She didn't need to say the sinner's prayer, or walk the asile, or any of that; she believed and God revealed himself to her in daily tangible ways. It is a powerful story. It strips away the sales tactics used in presenting the Gospel and the decisional pressuring and the idea of choosing between good/bad or heaven/hell. She did not know she was a sinner, or that she was headed to hell, she just knew that there had to be someone out there who was in control of all of creation, she had heard that he is God and that was who she was trusting in.

As we go through this world and we talk about the prince of out hearts, and we witness to what Jesus Christ has done in our lives we do not know who may be listening, who may hear our praise, who may see our worship... and who may cry out to know this Savior of whom we speak. I do not know who God is saving, so as I have the opportunity I tell what he has done for me and I trust Him to work in the hearts of those who hear. The word says:

Quote:But thanks be to God, who in Christ always leads us in triumphal procession, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere. 15 For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life. Who is sufficient for these things? 17 For we are not, like so many, peddlers of God's word, but as men of sincerity, as commissioned by God, in the sight of God we speak in Christ. 2 Cor.2:14-17

[Historian]

That was an interesting article. It's been my experience in China to see people's lives changed and showing fruits of the Holy Spirit while not knowing a whole lot more than that they have nothing in themselves, need everything from God and trust that somehow God will have mercy on them becaue of Jesus Christ–even if they aren't at first sure how or what that is. It makes all the NT talk about babies, little children, strong young men and fathers make a lot of sense. If you look at it that way, you know babies don't know much at all about their parents. They don't even have a frame of reference to begin to understand what Dad and Mom are–what they go through, what work is, what a parent/child relationship is, how to please them, etc, etc, etc. They only know: "Those are the people I absolutely depend on, and when I need something I cry out to them for it." And as that author points out, many saved in the Old Testament had no specific and exact knowledge of Jesus Christ–they only were trusting that God was faithful and depending on Him. So I would agree that exact Roman's Road knowledge is not essential.

But I also think such an idea could possibly be taken too far. I'm not sure that Rachel Evens does so, though her first paragraph concerns me: "That’s what I used to think. Until I made friends with some first generation South Koreans at seminary, the majority of whom believed that Jesus died primarily to release them from shame and fear."

I think the Bible is crystal clear that Jesus died primarily to free us from sin. Maybe I'm not understanding the wording correctly, but to me in that context of Asian thought "shame" is the worst possible thing. To lose face is horrible, and it is a problem mostly based on pride. "My pride is hurt; I have shame, because others do not hold me in perfect and high esteem." To the Asian mind, their primary problem is not that they are sinners. It is that others think they are sinners. Self-interest can often be subordinated to self-image.

If we use shame in the Western sense, "feeling bad because I did something I should not have done, or failed to do something I should have done", then we can say that Jesus did free us from shame, as well as sin, because He saved us from sin. But in the Asian context, that makes me wary. To me it's saying "Jesus didn't die to save me from sin, because I don't have a problem like that. He died to make me feel confident that there's nothing wrong with me."

And I think there are some absolutes of revelation that must be believed. I don't think that means they all must be thoroughly understood and believed right from the beginning, but there needs to be progress to them, and anyone who rejects them knowingly cannot be considered a Christian. Jesus says he is the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except by Him. This is non-negotiable. John really says the same thing: ..and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. Paul says to be saved, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ." He doesn't ask the man to go through a theology study with him, or even to repeat certain specifics about Jesus in order to qualify. But he does make it clear that salvation is through Jesus. I don't think that's incompatible with the good point Evans makes that God's revelation to us is primarily self-revelation. She's right: God presents Himself as a faithful being who can and should be trusted and obeyed. He spends a lot of time showcasing His own character, which draws a person to Him. Jesus is, though, the final and best revelation of God.

[greg]

A very interesting article. Salvation is vastly more "mysterious" than I was brought up to believe, and I certainly don't completely understand it even now, doubt I ever will this side of eternity.

I have been coming back to Romans very often lately, particularly chapter 1, for this chapter addresses several key issues that have come up recently. But let's have a look once again.

Romans 1-18-20

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature - have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."

Some points from these verses:

1) The "truth" of God can be suppressed. How? By man's wickedness, which brings God's wrath.
2) God makes himself "plain" or clear to men.
3) God goes so far as to "reveal" even His eternal power and divine nature (KJV says Godhead here, and I prefer that) to men.
4) because our Sovereign God does all of this for "all" men. We are without excuse. So there is no divine picking and choosing. God reveals Himself to "all" based on that "fact" man then, has a responsibility to "act" on that knowledge.

I think the "above' is so fascinating because God does all of this, and has been doing all of this, before any NT, before any preachers, before any denominations! Indeed "since the creation of the world."

[Ricardo]

Greg,

What is a "godhead?"

Any specific reason why you would go against the overwhelming majority of translators and biblical scholars?

[greg]

(07-27-2012 02:52 PM)Ricardo Wrote:  Greg,

What is a "godhead?"

Any specific reason why you would go against the overwhelming majority of translators and biblical scholars?

From having done most of memory work from the KJV growing up. I did abit more checking today and it appears that "divine nature" is actully "better" than Godhead, to be completely honest, before checking I thought that Godhead had some allusion to the Trinity, but it doesn't appear to.

[Ricardo]

What? no evil intent, Greg? I will have to admit, I also prefer some archaic translations from the Reina Valera version, simply because it is the translation I memorized most of my verses with...

I continue changing every few years the version I use for my annual reading cover to cover, in order to remind myself that it is not the words themselves the ones that hold The Power.

[DaisyDeadhead]

(07-27-2012 07:51 PM)greg Wrote:  From having done most of memory work from the KJV growing up.

What is "memory work"? Memorizing?

[boymom]

(07-30-2012 02:07 PM)DaisyDeadhead Wrote:  

(07-27-2012 07:51 PM)greg Wrote:  From having done most of memory work from the KJV growing up.

What is "memory work"? Memorizing?

Yes. Usually, memorizing 'important' verses, such as John 3:16, or the verses in the Roman Road.