It's interesting to me that even though the passages you quoted, which included 'belief', also mentioned 'baptism' as a necessity, you skipped right over baptism. Belief, repentance, and baptism are all a part of Peter's answer to the question 'what shall we do to be saved' in Acts. The three are all actions that we MUST do to be saved. Hebrews 11 discusses so many heroes of faith, and all of them are commended for their ACTIONS, which fulfilled their faith and belief. Today, we also, must confirm our belief and faith by our action of obedience, which includes baptism. Salvation is a free gift from God, but we have to 'reach out' and take it.
I agree with you - sorry it appeared I skipped over baptism. I tried to emphasize it as part of what the Bible teaches we must do in our response to the gospel, and not merely believing.
"The word “believe” often stands for the entire response to the gospel of Christ...." Agreed. That has to be the case. Otherwise the Scriptures are in hopeless contradiction. Belief saves (Ac. 16:31), and yet baptism does, too (1 Pet. 3:21). Belief brings about remission of sins (Ac. 10:43), and yet baptism does, too (Ac. 2:38; 22:16). Belief is the precursor to receiving the Holy Spirit (Eph. 1:13), and yet baptism is, too (Ac. 2:38; cf. Mt. 3:16). The belief under consideration in all these passages must be a belief/faith that is "perfect"--that is, that has been completed by obedience (Jas. 2:22). If interested, some thoughts on this same topic can be viewed here: https://bibletruths.substack.com/p/faith-salvation-right
You say, "But I think there is a sense in which it [faith only] is true." That we are justified by faith is certainly true, but that is not the question. The question is, "Are we justified by faith ONLY." You did not address this, and that is the issue with denominationalism. "Only" and "alone" is "to the exclusion of all else and all others." Thus the theology of "faith alone" is true in no sense, for the simple reason ONLY and ALONE excludes all else, vis., grace, obedience and faithfulness.
I meant that the Bible teaches we are saved by the system of faith in Christ Jesus alone - meaning, the gospel of Christ plus nothing else. It's not the gospel plus the law of Moses, or work of human merit, or man's wisdom or philosophy. In that sense, if "faith only" is referring to the gospel system of faith in Jesus Christ - then yes, we are saved "only" by that. Our response to that is included within the gospel of Christ.
I've given a lot of thought to the question of which bits of theological information we must understand correctly in order to be born again. It seems there are two separate lists:
1. All true Christian doctrines, as outlined in the Bible (primarily in the New Testament), and
2. The things we can't get wrong
I would suggest that one can be wrong about the virgin birth, for example, and still be born again. It seems accurate to say that Jesus' virgin birth is an important bit of information, but that being wrong, incorrect, or misled about it wouldn't disqualify anyone. How would you respond?
My tentative conclusion is that anyone can begin a right relationship with God on the basis of this one verse: "And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." (Hebrews 11:6)
I'm no fan of easy-believism, to be sure... but it seems the list of things we must get right - at least initially - may be no longer than that. What do you think?
I've wondered about this same question before - still not sure I have wrapped my mind around it completely. What I have done is look through what was taught to people before they responded to the gospel in the book of Acts (Peter's sermon in Acts 2 is an example). In that sermon, Peter taught that Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah/Christ, and that His death and resurrection were all part of God's plan and what the Scriptures taught. With that being said - I do agree that what must be believed prior to being born again is relatively short. It's after baptism that Jesus told us to "teach them to observe all things" that He commanded us (Matthew 28:18-20).
I'm pretty sure we can't know it with certainty, so I hold the idea somewhat loosely.
If you don't mind, I'd love some feedback on this... please feel free to ask me to delete the comment if you think it might confuse anyone. I don't believe one must know the gospel to be saved. It's common to hear that there's only one way to be saved, in both the New and Old Testaments... and we appeal to Abraham believing God as the foundation. Hebrews 11 is full of people who also believed God, but did not know the details regarding the Messiah. Because Christians are considered Abraham's seed on the basis of our faith, I would suggest that anyone might be born again by simply responding to the Father's drawing by trusting Him with their life.
Knowing the gospel helps, obviously. I've been promoting biblical literacy and explaining the gospel as best I can for decades, so it matters... but I wonder whether we've added cultural assumptions to the process that keep people from understanding that coming to God in faith is primarily relational, not transactional.
Got any thoughts in response? I appreciate you. =)
This was broken down very well, thanks.
Thank you! I'm glad it made sense.
It's interesting to me that even though the passages you quoted, which included 'belief', also mentioned 'baptism' as a necessity, you skipped right over baptism. Belief, repentance, and baptism are all a part of Peter's answer to the question 'what shall we do to be saved' in Acts. The three are all actions that we MUST do to be saved. Hebrews 11 discusses so many heroes of faith, and all of them are commended for their ACTIONS, which fulfilled their faith and belief. Today, we also, must confirm our belief and faith by our action of obedience, which includes baptism. Salvation is a free gift from God, but we have to 'reach out' and take it.
I agree with you - sorry it appeared I skipped over baptism. I tried to emphasize it as part of what the Bible teaches we must do in our response to the gospel, and not merely believing.
"The word “believe” often stands for the entire response to the gospel of Christ...." Agreed. That has to be the case. Otherwise the Scriptures are in hopeless contradiction. Belief saves (Ac. 16:31), and yet baptism does, too (1 Pet. 3:21). Belief brings about remission of sins (Ac. 10:43), and yet baptism does, too (Ac. 2:38; 22:16). Belief is the precursor to receiving the Holy Spirit (Eph. 1:13), and yet baptism is, too (Ac. 2:38; cf. Mt. 3:16). The belief under consideration in all these passages must be a belief/faith that is "perfect"--that is, that has been completed by obedience (Jas. 2:22). If interested, some thoughts on this same topic can be viewed here: https://bibletruths.substack.com/p/faith-salvation-right
Great points! Thanks for sharing!
Great pushback on "easy believism". Far too few "pastors" are even saying the word repent these days!
You say, "But I think there is a sense in which it [faith only] is true." That we are justified by faith is certainly true, but that is not the question. The question is, "Are we justified by faith ONLY." You did not address this, and that is the issue with denominationalism. "Only" and "alone" is "to the exclusion of all else and all others." Thus the theology of "faith alone" is true in no sense, for the simple reason ONLY and ALONE excludes all else, vis., grace, obedience and faithfulness.
I meant that the Bible teaches we are saved by the system of faith in Christ Jesus alone - meaning, the gospel of Christ plus nothing else. It's not the gospel plus the law of Moses, or work of human merit, or man's wisdom or philosophy. In that sense, if "faith only" is referring to the gospel system of faith in Jesus Christ - then yes, we are saved "only" by that. Our response to that is included within the gospel of Christ.
Good stuff, Jameson.
I've given a lot of thought to the question of which bits of theological information we must understand correctly in order to be born again. It seems there are two separate lists:
1. All true Christian doctrines, as outlined in the Bible (primarily in the New Testament), and
2. The things we can't get wrong
I would suggest that one can be wrong about the virgin birth, for example, and still be born again. It seems accurate to say that Jesus' virgin birth is an important bit of information, but that being wrong, incorrect, or misled about it wouldn't disqualify anyone. How would you respond?
My tentative conclusion is that anyone can begin a right relationship with God on the basis of this one verse: "And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." (Hebrews 11:6)
I'm no fan of easy-believism, to be sure... but it seems the list of things we must get right - at least initially - may be no longer than that. What do you think?
I've wondered about this same question before - still not sure I have wrapped my mind around it completely. What I have done is look through what was taught to people before they responded to the gospel in the book of Acts (Peter's sermon in Acts 2 is an example). In that sermon, Peter taught that Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah/Christ, and that His death and resurrection were all part of God's plan and what the Scriptures taught. With that being said - I do agree that what must be believed prior to being born again is relatively short. It's after baptism that Jesus told us to "teach them to observe all things" that He commanded us (Matthew 28:18-20).
I'm pretty sure we can't know it with certainty, so I hold the idea somewhat loosely.
If you don't mind, I'd love some feedback on this... please feel free to ask me to delete the comment if you think it might confuse anyone. I don't believe one must know the gospel to be saved. It's common to hear that there's only one way to be saved, in both the New and Old Testaments... and we appeal to Abraham believing God as the foundation. Hebrews 11 is full of people who also believed God, but did not know the details regarding the Messiah. Because Christians are considered Abraham's seed on the basis of our faith, I would suggest that anyone might be born again by simply responding to the Father's drawing by trusting Him with their life.
Knowing the gospel helps, obviously. I've been promoting biblical literacy and explaining the gospel as best I can for decades, so it matters... but I wonder whether we've added cultural assumptions to the process that keep people from understanding that coming to God in faith is primarily relational, not transactional.
Got any thoughts in response? I appreciate you. =)