Is Faith Necessary for Salvation?

[DHK]

If that is what you believe then you are a Universalist and everyone goes to heaven according to your view.

I quoted the Word of God. Is God a universalist. Read my post again. Your argument is with Scripture not with me, unless you believe that God is a universalist. But that is not what I believe. So why the attack and unwarranted conclusions.

The Scriptures say: That HE is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but for the whole world.
Just because you are a Calvinist that doesn't give you the right to tear out Scripture and throw it in the trash can. If you didn't believe in the statement then look it up in 1John 2:1,2. Your argument is with God. It is plain statement from the Word of God. The atonement (propitiation) is not just for us (the elect) but for the whole world. I didn't write it. The Holy Spirit of God did.

He also said: And he that beleives not is already condemned because he has not believed the only begotten son of God.

There is belief and unbelief; but the Bible does not talk of blatant ignorance such as you do. It speaks of response to light that is given. God gives light to those that are receptive to it. Any person on this earth can be saved if they so desire it. God is love, and a God of grace. God is not williing that any should perish. That is a fact. And if there are some that are willing to be saved, he will not leave them in the cold without a Saviour, just as He sent the Ninehvites Jonah. There is a God-sized vaccuum within every man that only God himself can fill.
DHK

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

As I told Amy in regards to your view...

You said that you cannot separate belief from the atonement.

You further argued that Christ is propitiation for everyone at all times.

Therefore if you cannot separate belief from the atonement and the atonement is made for all people then according to your view all people will be saved.

 

[Blammo]

You can not seperate belief from the atonement...

The atonement is sufficient for all men at all times.
The atonement is efficient only to those who believe.

Man, I know it is tough to comprehend. Does that clear it up for ya?

 

[Amy.G]

In the OT God spoke directly to whom ever wished. God speaking directly to someone today is done through the preaching of the gospel.

Can God still not speak directly to whom He wishes? If there are still areas of the world where the gospel message cannot go, won't God reveal Himself to people who seek Him in some way? I just cannot get around this. If God is fair and just (and He is) would He not make a way for anyone who desired Him? I guess I was saved not because I called out to God but because I live in a country where the gospel is preached.

 

[DHK]

As I told Amy in regards to your view...

You further argued that Christ is propitiation for everyone at all times.

You poor soul: I didn't say that. The Holy Spirit of God did. You can find it in 1John 2:1,2

 

[Amy.G]

Therefore if you cannot separate belief from the atonement and the atonement is made for all people then according to your view all people will be saved

No, No, No! The atonement has been made for all, but only those that believe and accept the gift will be saved. Those that do not believe are condemned.
Oh....and what Blammo said.

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

You poor soul: I didn't say that. The Holy Spirit of God did. You can find it in 1John 2:1,2

Please deal with the substance that is being discussed... [demeaning language removed]
You said that belief and the atonement cannot be separated. The point is not that 1 Jo. 2:2 teaches general atonement or not, the point is that if you suggest it does and you say there is not separation of believe and the atonement then that requires that those atoned for all have saving grace. Otherwise you could argue for general atonement and still suggest that it is available but not automatic because in order to benefit from the atonement you would have to have believed in the gospel.

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

Can God still not speak directly to whom He wishes? If there are still areas of the world where the gospel message cannot go, won't God reveal Himself to people who seek Him in some way? I just cannot get around this. If God is fair and just (and He is) would He not make a way for anyone who desired Him? I guess I was saved not because I called out to God but because I live in a country where the gospel is preached.

Amy you have to contend with Scripture and your problem is that it does not favor your position. Read Hebrews 1 Amy:

1:1 Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. 3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.

The question is not what God can or cannot do. Sure if God wanted to speak directly to an individual he could. God does speak to individuals through the Holy Spirit once they are born again. With the OT the people whom God communicated directly were prophets. Today we have a complete record of God's revelation. The Bible is the special revelation of God that is needed in order to be saved.

If you want to argue the merits of your case based on hypotheticals then I will challenge you to solve this question: Can God make something so big that he cannot move it? Have fun.

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

You can not seperate belief from the atonement...

The atonement is sufficient for all men at all times.
The atonement is efficient only to those who believe.

Man, I know it is tough to comprehend. Does that clear it up for ya?

Blammo,

What you suggest is nonsensical. On the one hand you agree that you cannot separate belief from the atonement. On the other hand you suggest the atonement is for all men at all times. Final you destroy your original truth claim by suggesting that only those who believe receive benefit of the atonement.

Keep in mind I am not arguing in this forum the merits of limited atonement. I am merely arguing that regardless of whether or not you hold to general atonement the truth remains that only those who believe in Christ are saved. Therefore you have presented a case (apart from your claim that you cannot separate belief from the atonement) that supports my position.

 

[Blammo]

You must believe to receive the atonement. The atonement without belief is not effective. The atonement is sufficient for all men at all times. You can't seperate belief from the atonement with regards to salvation. In order to complete the reconciliation, you must have belief.

Romans 3:21-26 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

You must believe to receive the atonement. The atonement without belief is not effective. The atonement is sufficient for all men at all times. You can't seperate belief from the atonement with regards to salvation. In order to complete the reconciliation, you must have belief.

Romans 3:21-26 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

You can separate belief from the atonement if only those are believe benefit from the atonement. For those who do not believe they have no benefit from the atonement, so they are separated from the atonement. Do you see how the nuance that I have just presented undermines the absolute validity of your statement that you cannot separate belief from the atonement. If that were absolutely true then the atonement would be tied to all whom it was intended whether they believed or not. So there is a distinction in atonement and belief. The two concepts are entirely separable. Those for whom benefit from the atonement are those whom believe. Those who do not believe do not benefit.

Now my question for the board is this, did Jesus mean it when he said that he was the way truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but by Him or not? Because people in here like Amy and DHK have some explaining to do when they suggest that someone can be saved apart from faith in Christ.

 

[Blammo]

You can separate belief from the atonement if only those are believe benefit from the atonement. For those who do not believe they have no benefit from the atonement, so they are separated from the atonement. Do you see how the nuance that I have just presented undermines the absolute validity of your statement that you cannot separate belief from the atonement. If that were absolutely true then the atonement would be tied to all whom it was intended whether they believed or not. So there is a distinction in atonement and belief. The two concepts are entirely separable. Those for whom benefit from the atonement are those whom believe. Those who do not believe do not benefit.

Now my question for the board is this, did Jesus mean it when he said that he was the way truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but by Him or not? Because people in here like Amy and DHK have some explaining to do when they suggest that someone can be saved apart from faith in Christ.

Is faith necessary for Salvation? I would assume your answer is yes. (Me too)
Is belief necessary to receive the atonement? Isn't that pretty much the same question?

For me, it used to be as simple as, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.", now I have all sorts of questions that are piling up faster than they are answered.

Here is one: If belief (faith) is necessary for salvation, what about infants and idiots, can they have faith in Christ? Are they not saved without the requirement of faith? This question leads me to another: Is it possible that Christ died for the sins of the whole world, and the only reason person goes to hell is for unbelief? (Not sin in general, just unbelief)

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

Is faith necessary for Salvation? I would assume your answer is yes. (Me too)
Is belief necessary to receive the atonement? Isn't that pretty much the same question?

For me, it used to be as simple as, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.", now I have all sorts of questions that are piling up faster than they are answered.

Here is one: If belief (faith) is necessary for salvation, what about infants and idiots, can they have faith in Christ? Are they not saved without the requirement of faith? This question leads me to another: Is it possible that Christ died for the sins of the whole world, and the only reason person goes to hell is for unbelief? (Not sin in general, just unbelief)

Blammo,

You are really on to something but I want to caution you to think through what you are asking.

1. Infants and mentally retarded (idiots is a bit harsh don't you think? How you like it if someone referred to your child as an idiot?)

They have not reached a level of mental ascent where they can discern good from evil and they do not have the knowledge of Romans 1 that they had broken God's law. Therefore they are covered by a prevenient grace of sorts. This pertains to the age of accountability and I would classify all children who are not yet conscious of their fallen state in this category as well. They are to be distinguish from the rest of mankind who has reached a willful and wanton rebellion and stands condemned for having sinned in their heart against God.

2. The second question is precisely why Amy and DHK are way outside the bounds of evangelical theology. If everyone gets a chance and only the ones who do not believe are condemned then yes they are condemned for not believing when given the chance. Evidently apart from the gospel someone can just want to seek God and be saved according to this view. Sounds like self-righteousness and works based theology to me. If you desire to know and are found right with him apart from his special revelation then you saved yourself by your desire to know God. The view that suggest such is nothing more than a liberal inclusivism.

 

[Blammo]

1. Infants and mentally retarded (idiots is a bit harsh don't you think? How you like it if someone referred to your child as an idiot?)

You're right, that was not very PC of me. I guess that's what they used to call them, but today it's not very nice. If I had a mentally retarded child I would not enjoy the label idiot. I apologize.

They have not reached a level of mental ascent where they can discern good from evil and they do not have the knowledge of Romans 1 that they had broken God's law. Therefore they are covered by a prevenient grace of sorts. This pertains to the age of accountability and I would classify all children who are not yet conscious of their fallen state in this category as well. They are to be distinguish from the rest of mankind who has reached a willful and wanton rebellion and stands condemned for having sinned in their heart against God.

But they are in Adam, are they not? And in Adam all die. Did anyone go to heaven before the atonement was made?

2. The second question is precisely why Amy and DHK are way outside the bounds of evangelical theology. If everyone gets a chance and only the ones who do not believe are condemned then yes they are condemned for not believing when given the chance. Evidently apart from the gospel someone can just want to seek God and be saved according to this view. Sounds like self-righteousness and works based theology to me. If you desire to know and are found right with him apart from his special revelation then you saved yourself by your desire to know God. The view that suggest such is nothing more than a liberal inclusivism.

Well, the gospel is good news, and you do need to hear the good news to believe it. Good news that is not heard is still good news. And, if you don't hear the good news, you can't believe it. Good news is only good because without it, something is bad. The bad news is God has concluded all in unbelief. Now, the only way they can be saved from unbelief is to hear the good news and believe it. (?)

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

You're right, that was not very PC of me. I guess that's what they used to call them, but today it's not very nice. If I had a mentally retarded child I would not enjoy the label idiot. I apologize.

I was not offended but wanted to change the tone of that question.

But they are in Adam, are they not? And in Adam all die. Did anyone go to heaven before the atonement was made?

Blammo this is an entirely other discussion but the age of accountability is a doctrine that has much validity.

Well, the gospel is good news, and you do need to hear the good news to believe it. Good news that is not heard is still good news. And, if you don't hear the good news, you can't believe it. Good news is only good because without it, something is bad. The bad news is God has concluded all in unbelief. Now, the only way they can be saved from unbelief is to hear the good news and believe it. (?)

Let me quote Romans 10 and John 3:18 again and with a plain reading of the text you decide what you think it means.

Romans 10:14 But how are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard?And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” 17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

John 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

When the Bible says that "no one is righteous no not one," Romans 3:10, how can anyone conclude that when left to our desire we will seek God.

For example, when the Bible says people are "dead in their transgressions" until God makes them alive (Eph. 2:1-5), I see this as explaining that people are incapable of believing, because sin has destroyed their moral freedom, until God gives them new life in Christ.

 

[Tom Butler]

You forgot Jonah and Ninevah, for one.

I surely did and thanks for reminding me.

 

[Tom Butler]

I have also used Abraham as an example. Who preached to him?

My answer will be quick so as not to sidetrack the post. The book of Jasher (mentioned in Joshua 10) is still in existence and tells us that Abraham, son of a pagan, lived with Noah and Shem for 10 years and they taught him about Jehovah.

And, of course, God spoke directly to Abraham, as well.

 

[russell55]

If there are still areas of the world where the gospel message cannot go, won't God reveal Himself to people who seek Him in some way? I just cannot get around this. If God is fair and just (and He is) would He not make a way for anyone who desired Him?

I think I agree with you, that if someone were to genuinely seek God, God would reveal himself to them. However, I don't think that scripture ever really speaks to this specific question, and I think there's a reason for that: It's a hypothetical that has no basis in reality. The same passage of scripture that those Romans 1 passages are in tells us that no one seeks God, and that's part of the justification for the statement that "all have sinned." Seeking God comes only under the influence of the Holy Spirit, so when we hear those stories of heathen who respond with joy to the message of the gospel from a missionary because it's what they've been searching for, I'd guess that the Holy Spirit has been doing preparation for the coming of a missionary. But human beings, as they are, don't "seek God in someway." In fact, they are working hard to suppress what knowledge of the true God (see the rest of Romans 1, where it says that idol making is not seeking God, but trading the "the glory of the immortal God [which that passage has already said that they know] for an image resembling mortal human beings or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles." So what we may intuitively see as "God-seeking" is really "God-rejecting".

I guess I was saved not because I called out to God but because I live in a country where the gospel is preached.

Technically, you were not saved "because" you called out to God, but because of the work of Christ on you behalf. The only grounds for salvation is Christ's work. That doen't mean that it wasn't necessary for you to call out to God and hear the gospel in order for you to be saved, but all those things answer the question of how we are saved and not why we are saved.

But to get back to the point of your statement, it isn't one thing or the other that is necessary for salvation, but both...and more. The passage quoted for you from Romans 10 says so: believing is necessary, hearing is necessary, sending of the messenger is necessary.

 

[Baptist_Pastor/Theologian]

My answer will be quick so as not to sidetrack the post. The book of Jasher (mentioned in Joshua 10) is still in existence and tells us that Abraham, son of a pagan, lived with Noah and Shem for 10 years and they taught him about Jehovah.

And, of course, God spoke directly to Abraham, as well.

That is just the thing Tom, the OT prophets were the very mouth piece of God, a distinction that the general population hardly enjoyed. Moreover, Hebrews 1:1-3 makes plain that regardless of the ways God worked in times past today he choses to work through his Son Jesus Christ.

Romans 10 is very hard to do away with, "faith comes through hearing the Word and the Word comes from being preached, and those who preach must be sent. Moreover, how can they call on whom they have not believed and how can they believe without hearing." Seems pretty clear to me.

BTW, Tom I loved you list of what you were hearing in this thread, it was so dead on.

 

[Blammo]

Time for me to clear a few things up here. So there is no confusion on your part as to what I believe. (Remember, when I ask a question, it is a question.)

I was not offended but wanted to change the tone of that question.

Good call

Blammo this is an entirely other discussion but the age of accountability is a doctrine that has much validity.

I agree with you on the age of accountability.

Let me quote Romans 10 and John 3:18 again and with a plain reading of the text you decide what you think it means.

I think it means: He who hears the gospel and believes is saved/ He who hears the gospel and does not believe is condemned ALREADY/ and there has to be a third catigory / He who does not hear the gospel does not believe, and, he is condemned ALREADY

When the Bible says that "no one is righteous no not one," Romans 3:10, how can anyone conclude that when left to our desire we will seek God.

I don't conclude that.

For example, when the Bible says people are "dead in their transgressions" until God makes them alive (Eph. 2:1-5), I see this as explaining that people are incapable of believing, because sin has destroyed their moral freedom, until God gives them new life in Christ.

We almost agree on this. I don't believe someone has to be saved before they can believe, but I do believe someone must be persuaded by the word of God and the Holy Ghost.