Cherry Picking Christianity: What Is It and Why Should We Avoid Doing It?
Part 2: Romans 10:9-10.
In our last article, we discussed both the definition and danger of “cherry picking” certain verses of the Bible out of their original contexts. We pointed out that all of God’s Word is inspired truth and that we must not add to or take away from it.
In this article, we want to look at a specific passage that has been taken out of its context and has been abused to teach false doctrine: Romans 10:9-10.
The Context of Romans
As we set the context, it is important to discuss the overall context of Romans.
The apostle Paul is writing to Christians in Rome (Rom. 1:7). These are saints who had obeyed the Gospel of Christ and were added by the Lord to the church (Acts 2:47).
The New Testament teaches that for one to become a Christian, he or she must hear the truth (Rom. 10:17; John 6:44-45), believe that Jesus is the Son of God (John 3:16; 8:24), repent of sins (Acts 2:38; 3:19; 17:30), confess with the mouth the Deity of Jesus (Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:9-10), and be baptized into Christ for the remission of sins (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Gal. 3:27; 1 Pet. 3:21). He or she then must live faithfully if they want Heaven to be their home because it is possible to lose one’s salvation (1 John 1:7-9; Rev. 2:10; 2 Pet. 1:5-11; 2:20-22).
Friends, it is essential that we look at the totality of Scripture to arrive at this.
Considering Romans 10:9-10
Now, let’s look at the text under consideration:
“that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Rom. 10:9-10).
Many in the religious world read and examine this passage and come to the conclusion that the only conditions for salvation are “belief” and “confession.” The phrase, “you will be saved,” connects back to those two things specified.
Who is Paul writing to? Would the same audience who were reminded of their obedience to the Gospel, i.e, dying to sin and being baptized into Christ (Rom. 6:3-6), see a contradiction here? Are the two conditions mentioned, namely “belief” and “confession,” essential to one’s salvation? Absolutely!
The danger is “cherry picking” this passage to say that these are the ONLY requirements for salvation. There is a harmonious solution to this problem.
Last week, we pointed to the fact that the entirety of God’s Word is truth (Psa. 119:160). We must not reject some passages and accept others; rather, we are to arrive at the truth by piecing it all together. The Bible does not contradict itself because its Author is God Who is NOT the Author of confusion (1 Cor. 14:33).
Once again, Romans 10:9-10 mentions two conditions for salvation: Belief and confession.
Question: Where is repentance? Is repentance not a condition for salvation?
Jesus said that one who refuses repentance will perish (Luke 13:3). Paul wrote that godly sorrow produces repentance which leads to salvation (2 Cor. 7:10). Repentance was included in the Great Commission given by the Lord (Luke 24:47). Repentance was proclaimed by the inspired apostle Peter on the Day of Pentecost when he said, “Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). All people everywhere are required to repent in view of the coming judgment (Acts 17:30-31).
Based on these passages, repentance is a condition for salvation, but it is not mentioned in Romans 10:9-10. Is there a contradiction, or must it be the case that “believe” and “confess” embrace all of God’s redemptive conditions, including repentance and baptism?
Romans 10:9-10 does not mention baptism, but baptism is inseparably connected with salvation all throughout the New Testament (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Rom. 6:3-4; Gal. 3:26-27; John 3:5; Tit. 3:5; 1 Pet. 3:21). Immersion in water to contact the blood of Jesus Christ is an essential condition one must meet in order to be saved!
Carefully consider every conversion in the Book of Acts and note that baptism was included in every conversion.
An honest Bible student will appreciate the fact that in order to arrive at truth and be pleasing to God, one must consider the totality of God’s Word, understanding that the Bible does not contradict itself.
Let us be careful not to “cherry pick” verses to fit what we believe, but simply surrender to the truth of God’s Word in faithful obedience (1 Pet. 1:22; Jas. 1:21-22).
Drew Suttles is a minister for the Quitman church of Christ in Quitman, Georgia, and one of my best friends in this world. They live-stream all their Bible classes and sermons on their YouTube channel.
Drew also hosts the “Weathering the Storm” podcast on the Scattered Abroad Network. Drew talks about facing life’s challenges as a child of God. His podcast will be a blessing to your life.
 | A guest post by
|
Amen
Hey Drew... thanks for so many great articles!
I would take issue this time, though. I hope you don't mind.
When we want to know all about the Trinity, it's wise and good to gather all of the information we can from all of the passages that touch on the subject. Cherry picking happens all too often in situations like these. One example is the guy who's been writing to convince me that universalism is true... he has to ignore lots of passages to fit his idea into a very tight space.
With narrative, however, it might not be as wise to try to arrive at the truth by 'piecing it all together.' I would suggest another approach.
I'm sure we can agree that each and every Scriptural explanation of how to be saved is correct. Peter was right at Pentecost. Paul was right in Romans 10. When Paul and Silas were freed from the Philippian prison, they accurately explained exactly how the jailer could be saved... didn't they?
It would make no sense for any single explanation of how to be saved to be incomplete. Rather than suggesting that the Philippian jailer needed to piece together Acts 2 and Romans 10 to know how he could be saved, we should rest assured that Paul and Silas told him everything he needed to know.
In other words: every explanation of salvation in the New Testament must stand on its own. Otherwise, we must conclude that some of them are incomplete... and so, as with the jailer, not able to save at all.
What are your thoughts?