Saved Without Knowing the Resurrection?

[Scripture More Accurately]

What is flawed about going to the Scripture and showing exactly what the Gospel presentations were in Acts? Please go through them and show me what I missed. I stated that the burial of Christ was not one time mentioned in the Gospel presentations of Acts 1-10. Don't just quit the discussion. Show me where I am wrong. Man, if I'm wrong about the content of the Gospel I really want to know it so I can correct my message in soul winning, and interpret "Scripture More Accurately."

Otherwise, I guess not only me, but Peter and the other Gospel preachers in Acts totally blew it. So apparently no one got saved in the first 10 chapters of Acts because the burial was not preached.

You wrongly claimed in post #95 that "the witnesses are not mentioned until Ch. 10":

"@Scripture More Accurately:

I just went through the first ten chapters of Acts, looking at the various presentations of the Gospel. Note that there no mentions of the burial of Christ in any of the presentations, and the witnesses are not mentioned until Ch. 10:"

I showed that claim was categorically false. Someone who really wants to be shown where he is wrong would have acknowledged that what he had said was wrong.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

But you have not answered Post #93, in which I point out that the burial and witnesses are human actions, but the death for our sins and resurrection are things done by Christ Himself. If you are correct, there are four elements to the Gospel, but two of them are human centered. It is the Gospel that saves. How do these human actions save?

This is not an "argument from silence," but a cogent theological argument. If you can't answer it, fine. Take your leave!

This is a faulty theological argument. I have answered it, but you dismissed the answers that I gave.

 

[John of Japan]

This is a faulty theological argument. I have answered it, but you dismissed the answers that I gave.

I'm sorry I missed that. In which post did you answer it? I'd be happy to interact fully with you on that.

 

[John of Japan]

You wrongly claimed in post #95 that "the witnesses are not mentioned until Ch. 10":

"@Scripture More Accurately:

Again, in what post did you do this? I'm an old man and was in a hurrty--just yad a few minutes.

"I just went through the first ten chapters of Acts, looking at the various presentations of the Gospel. Note that there no mentions of the burial of Christ in any of the presentations, and the witnesses are not mentioned until Ch. 10:"

This was my own argument. There is a way to put quotes around it

I showed that claim was categorically false. Someone who really wants to be shown where he is wrong would have acknowledged that what he had said was wrong.

My point was that in the Gospel presentations the witnesses were not mentioned, not that they were not mentioned at all.

 

[John of Japan]

Wrong. Peter was an eyewitness himself and declared that he and others were witnesses of the Resurrection repeatedly before Acts 10:

Acts 2:32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

Acts 3:15 And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. 31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

I am not going to waste any more time in this discussion addressing such factually incorrect statements. Your approach to interpreting Scripture that emphasizes argument from silence is deeply flawed.

I remember now. Sorry.

Okay, you make some good points, but if the Gospel was what you said it was, the witnesses should be mentioned in every Gospel presentation, not just some. And the burial should be proclaimed in every presentation, and it is in none.

And what you have not answered:
1. Can you name a single theologian, pastor, etc. who agrees with you?
2. Do you go soul winning? If so, are you sure to mention the burial and witnesses every time? And are they in the tracts you give out?

 

[canadyjd]

Hypothetical….

You are witnessing to a lost person. You tell them Jesus died on a cross for their sins and they can be saved through faith in Jesus…

Before you can mention the resurrection, the person exclaims “I believe!!” “I am a sinner and I know my Lord Jesus has saved me by faith!!

Are you claiming this is not possible? That a person cannot be brought to salvation by God Holy Spirit unless the resurrection is mentioned?

peace to you

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Hypothetical….

You are witnessing to a lost person. You tell them Jesus died on a cross for their sins and they can be saved through faith in Jesus…

Before you can mention the resurrection, the person exclaims “I believe!!” “I am a sinner and I know my Lord Jesus has saved me by faith!!

Are you claiming this is not possible? That a person cannot be brought to salvation by God Holy Spirit unless the resurrection is mentioned?

peace to you

I would never witness to anyone this way. The Bible says that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God (Rom. 10:17). If I were given the opportunity and not cut off by the person or someone else or providentially hindered in some other manner, I would not care what a lost person says that he claims to believe and have been saved. I would testify to him fully according to what Scripture reveals regardless of his claims.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

I remember now. Sorry.

Okay, you make some good points, but if the Gospel was what you said it was, the witnesses should be mentioned in every Gospel presentation, not just some. And the burial should be proclaimed in every presentation, and it is in none.

And what you have not answered:
1. Can you name a single theologian, pastor, etc. who agrees with you?
2. Do you go soul winning? If so, are you sure to mention the burial and witnesses every time? And are they in the tracts you give out?

No, you employ a faulty method of interpretation when you assert that lack of mention is proof of absence.

Your other questions are irrelevant. If discussing the Bible itself is not good enough for you, there is nothing left to discuss.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

I'm sorry I missed that. In which post did you answer it? I'd be happy to interact fully with you on that.

I already provided Scripture to you that explicitly says that the Resurrection appearances were all the work of God Himself. They were not at all in any way the work of any man.

Furthermore, you do not understand properly what the Bible means when it speaks of someone in the apostolic company's being a witness. No one saw the actual Resurrection of Christ take place. No one can be an actual witness of that reality.

When Christ commissioned His disciples to be witnesses of the Resurrection, they were commissioned to tell people that they themselves saw Him, heard Him, touched Him, ate and drank with Him, etc. in one of His appearances after He arose. That is precisely what they did.

The same was true of Paul:

Acts 22:14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. 15 For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.

Whenever Paul would have failed to tell anyone that he saw Christ and heard Him, he would have failed to do what God chose him to do as a witness of Christ. As an eyewitness of the risen Christ, Paul always told people about Christ's appearing to him whenever he was able to do so.

 

[John of Japan]

Sadly, you are very mistaken in this understanding. No one saw the risen Christ except for people whom God specifically chose to show Him to them:

Acts 10:40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly; 41 Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.

That proves nothing. You are still saying that half of the Gospel is through human effort. If my loved one dies and God leads me to a particular funeral home, I am still the one who buries my loved one. Scripture is very clear. The Bible specifically states that Joseph of Arimathea buried Jesus in
Matthew 27:60: "And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed." So you are saying a human action, the burial, is part of the Gospel of Christ.


If I am led by the Holy Spirit to give the Gospel to someone, it is still I who gives the Gospel. We humans are God's plan for the Great Commission.

To tell people about the ones who were eyewitnesses to the Resurrection glorifies God who specifically chose all of them beforehand that they would see the risen Christ! The Resurrection appearances of Christ were the work of God the Father and of Christ and not the work of man.

Well, sure, God led. But it was still a human work to actually look with one's eyes. No one said that God was the witnesses in 1 Cor. 15. The witnesses were human, the eyes were human

Concerning the theological importance of the burial of Christ, many passages stress its importance.

Name them.

Following Paul in evangelizing people by giving them the gospel of Christ's death, burial, resurrection, and appearances is fully biblical, glorifies God, and gives sinners the God-intended gospel content that God wants them to receive.

And again, do you do that? Are you sure to tell people that? Do you witness for Christ making sure of your Gospel, and are you sure you pass out tracts that have the burial and the witnesses? (That's a rare tract if you do, by the way. I've read and/or passed out 100s of different tracts, and it is very rare to see the burial and witnesses both in one.)

 

[John of Japan]

No, you employ a faulty method of interpretation when you assert that lack of mention is proof of absence.

Please elaborate. How is lack of mention not a form of proof.

If a politician never mentions finances, isn't that a proof that it is not a concern of his?

Your other questions are irrelevant.

So, in other words, you know no theologians, pastors, evangelists, or missionaries, or Bible teachers who agree with you about the content of the Gospel. If you did know someone you'd mention them and not obfuscate.

If discussing the Bible itself is not good enough for you, there is nothing left to discuss.

Oh, come on, I've given a bunch of Scriptures and discussed a bunch of Bible on this thread. The OP was all about the Scriptures.

We are discussing theology, so what's the matter with calling in a few theologians.

If you ask me, you're running out of answers and arguments, and want out.

 

[John of Japan]

I've been looking at my 50+ books on evangelism, and will give some quotes. Samuel Zwemer, a famous missionary of bygone days, wrote, "Until we grapple with the fact of sin we do not preach the gospel of 'the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world.'" (Evangelism Today, 1944, p. 32). So the substitutionary atonement by Christ on the cross is central in the Gospel.

 

[John of Japan]

Zwemer (1867-1952) further wrote, "Paul's evangel was Christ crucified. He used 'the preaching of the Cross' as synonymous for Christianity's message to the world (1 Cor. 1:18). Paul always linked the Resurrection to the Crucifixion (1 Cor. 15:3-4).... The Resurrection of Christ confirms all He was and did and suffered for us on the Cross, sealing it with God's approval and confirming it by the greatest miracle of history" (Ibid., p. 49). So to Zwemer the Resurrection of Christ has as its importance that it verifies everything about our Savior!

This great Reformed missionary-scholar did not leave out the resurrection, but gave it great emphasis. "Above all, we need to give that message the place and emphasis it has in the New Testament. The word resurrection does not occur in the Old Testament. In the New Testament it is found 40 times" (p. 54).

He did not, however, give equal importance to the burial and to the witnesses. In fact, I can't even find where he mentions them.

 

[John of Japan]

Ray Comfort is a more modern writer, and his videos are very popular. While I disagree with some of what he writes (he occasionally goes all allegorical on Scripture, for example), he has some excellent emphases on preaching sin through the Law, and avoiding a Gospel that promises happiness without addressing sin.

At any rate, here's a quote about how to give the Gospel: "Take the time to explain the plan of salvation thoroughly: 'God loves you so much that He sent His only Son to suffer and die in your place, taking your punishment for you so that you could live. Then Jesus rose from the dead and defeated death. It is this simple: You broke the Law and Jesus paid your fine. If you will repent--turn away from sin--and place your trust in Jesus Christ as your Savior, God will forgive you and grant you everlasting life. He will change you from the inside out and make you a new person in Christ'" (Way of the Master, 2006, p. 197).

Nothing about the burial and witnesses there, but a very clear statement of the Gospel.

 

[canadyjd]

I would never witness to anyone this way. The Bible says that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God (Rom. 10:17). If I were given the opportunity and not cut off by the person or someone else or providentially hindered in some other manner, I would not care what a lost person says that he claims to believe and have been saved. I would testify to him fully according to what Scripture reveals regardless of his claims.

And he tells you, “yes, I know. I am already a Christian. I believed when I heard Jesus had died for my sins on a cross. I would like to know more about baptism, the resurrection, ascension, end time rapture, and everything else you want to share, but I already am saved by faith in my Lord Jesus.”

Do you declare the person unsaved because they didn’t know the resurrection when they believed?

peace to you

 

[John of Japan]

Hypothetical….

You are witnessing to a lost person. You tell them Jesus died on a cross for their sins and they can be saved through faith in Jesus…

Before you can mention the resurrection, the person exclaims “I believe!!” “I am a sinner and I know my Lord Jesus has saved me by faith!!

Are you claiming this is not possible? That a person cannot be brought to salvation by God Holy Spirit unless the resurrection is mentioned?

peace to you

Who is this aimed at? If at me, it is overly hypothetical. I've witnessed to hundreds in two languages, and never had anything remotely like this happen. I've read several books by others on folks getting saved (Dr. Wilson, John R. Rice, etc.), and even have a chapter like that in one of my own books, and what you are describing was not described in any of these books.

The reason for this is that no soul winner sees people saved without the Holy Spirit's power, and no one gets saved without the Holy Spirit's conviction (John 16:7-11) and then regeneration. And when the conviction comes, the prospect is either eager to hear the whole thing or eager to reject it. So it simply does not happen like in your hypothetical. Now if you can give me a real life illustration....

 

[canadyjd]

Who is this aimed at? If at me, it is overly hypothetical. I've witnessed to hundreds in two languages, and never had anything remotely like this happen. I've read several books by others on folks getting saved (Dr. Wilson, John R. Rice, etc.), and even have a chapter like that in one of my own books, and what you are describing was not described in any of these books.

The reason for this is that no soul winner sees people saved without the Holy Spirit's power, and no one gets saved without the Holy Spirit's conviction (John 16:7-11) and then regeneration. And when the conviction comes, the prospect is either eager to hear the whole thing or eager to reject it. So it simply does not happen like in your hypothetical. Now if you can give me a real life illustration....

Are you claiming no one has ever been saved without understanding and believing the resurrection of Jesus Christ?

Peace to you

 

[John of Japan]

Are you claiming no one has ever been saved without understanding and believing the resurrection of Jesus Christ?

Peace to you

Let's put it biblically and logically. The Scripture is clear that the Gospel includes the Resurrection: 1 Cor. 15:1-8, the first ten chapters in Acts which I've gone through, etc. The Scripture is clear that the Gospel is necessary for salvation (Rom. 1:16, etc.).

So yes, post-crucifixion there must be knowledge of the resurrection for salvation. The Resurrection of Christ is what makes the rest of the Gospel powerful. "Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification" (Romans 4:25).

That knowledge could be implicit or explicit. I am 100% in favor of making it explicit. However, many Americans know about the Resurrection of Christ implicitly because of their knowledge of Easter. At the same time, in the typical heathen country (I've preached in several, Buddhist, Shinto, Muslim, Hindu), the Resurrection is completely outside of their knowledge, implicit or explicit. In such a society, the wise witness and missionary makes sure to make the Resurrection of Christ explicit because of their complete lack of knowledge of it.

 

[John of Japan]

Greatly used Evangelist Bob Sumner wrote, "This 'believing' is a personal faith in the work of the Saviour on the cross, a believing that He died and rose again to provide a perfect redemption for sinners. You may want to explain that a dead Saviour, One who was not 'raised...from the dead,' could save no one" (Biblical Evangelism, 1966, p. 170).

 

[37818]

There are also the issue of translations denying the bodily resurrection. By rendering "natural body" as a "physical body" causing the reader not to understand the translation "spiritual body" to be also a flesh and bone "body." NWT, RSV, and some others.

Re: 1 Corinthians 15:44, ". . . It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. . . ."