Saved Without Knowing the Resurrection?

[John of Japan]

It may be an exercise in human hubris to declare God Holy Spirit is unable to accomplish salvation without mentioning the resurrection, even though the resurrection is crucial to understanding our salvation.

peace to you

So, was it human hubris (is there any other kind?) for Paul to insist on the correct Gospel, saying that someone with "any other Gospel" was "accurse"?

Hubris: "excessive pride or self-confidence." (hubris definition - Google Search)

It is a serious charge to say someone insisting on getting the Gospel right has "hubris."

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Our pattern for how we present the Gospel must be the book of Acts. Where in Acts did anyone say that Christ was buried? Five times Acts mentions other people being buried, but not Christ.

Paul mentions the Gospel 13 times in Romans, but never once mentions the burial or the witnesses.

Paul excoriates the Galatians for having the wrong Gospel, but never mentions the burial or the witnesses in that epistle.

I already gave you an explicit statement from Acts where Paul preached the gospel by saying that Jesus was buried:

Acts 13:29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.

No, Paul does mention the burial in Romans:

Romans 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Your claim about Paul's not mentioning the burial or witnesses in Galatians does not establish that we should not do so, and it does not prove anything about testifying to those truths in evangelism as being non-essential. First Corinthians 15:3-5 categorically establishes that both the burial and the appearances are part of the gospel message.

 

[John of Japan]

I already gave you an explicit statement from Acts where Paul preached the gospel by saying that Jesus was buried:

Acts 13:29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.

No, Paul does mention the burial in Romans:

Romans 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Good points. But I have to point out that Romans only has one mention, and it is specifically about baptism, not salvation. If I had said, "Buried in connection with salvation," I would have been correct. There is also one similar mention in Col. 2:12 about baptism. But nothing in either book about the burial in connection with presenting the Gospel or with salvation.

But if I may pursue this thought, there are various evangelistic events in Acts where the burial and witnesses are not mentioned. For just one example, Paul did not mention the burial of Christ or the witnesses in Acts 17, but he did emphasize the resurrection, and that was what caught their attention so that they asked for more. He then continued to teach about Christ, and some were saved (v. 34).

Your claim about Paul's not mentioning the burial or witnesses in Galatians does not establish that we should not do so, and it does not prove anything about testifying to those truths in evangelism as being non-essential.

Okay. Find the burial in other books of the NT in connection with salvation then.

First Corinthians 15:3-5 categorically establishes that both the burial and the appearances are part of the gospel message.

Not really. Burial proves death, and witnesses prove miracles. I still stand on that. It's not just my view, but that of various theologians. I got it from Stott. Thiessen wrote about the resurrection of Christ, "And now, positively, we would say that the proof of miracles rests on testimony" (Lectures in Systematic Theology, p. 37).

Can you come up with a single creditable theologian who agrees with you? Just one? I have systematic theologies of Chafer, Berkhof, Strong, etc., and have access to others. None of them agree with you. You are on your own with your belief.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

But if I may pursue this thought, there are various evangelistic events in Acts where the burial and witnesses are not mentioned. For just one example, Paul did not mention the burial of Christ or the witnesses in Acts 17, but he did emphasize the resurrection, and that was what caught their attention so that they asked for more. He then continued to teach about Christ, and some were saved (v. 34).

No, you are arguing from silence without any evidence from Scripture that proves that Acts 17 is a comprehensive record of all that Paul said in that evangelistic encounter. You, therefore, do not have any evidence to prove what Paul did not testify to in Athens.

I do not need any additional evidence. The four Gospels all state all 4 truths explicitly. 1 Cor. 15 and Acts 13 together prove that Paul testified to all 4 truths when he preached the gospel.

Again, Christ commissioned them to be witnesses of His resurrection (Luke 24:48; Acts 1:8, 22). They did so by telling people that they saw, heard, touched, ate and drank with the risen Christ, etc. (Matt. 28; Mark 16; Luke 24; John 20-21; Acts 2:32; 3:15; 5:32; 10:39-41; 13:31; 22:6-10; 26:12-18; 1 Cor. 15:3-8).

 

[JesusFan]

In a class I discussed the Gospel and urged the students to make sure the resurrection of Christ was always part of their Gospel presentations/evangelism, because that doctrine/event is clearly part of Paul's Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15. Again, in the book of Acts the resurrection of Christ was part of the Gospel presentations recorded there.

Then I was asked by a student, "Can a person be saved without knowing about the resurrection?" I'm not sure I gave a sufficient answer. What would you say?

No, as Paul stated under inspiration one must believe Jesus died in our place as our sin bearer, and was resurrected!

 

[Reynolds]

What in particular about Romans 10?

"that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;"

 

[percho]

The answer is "yes." God saves, but He saves through the truth of the Gospel. If you leave out the content of the message, no one will get saved.

1 Cor. 15:1 "Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain."

The Greek in this passage, "by which also ye are saved," is the preposition dia (δια) with the genitive: "through which you are saved." This preposition often has the instrumental force, meaning it is the means by which something happens.


Excellent!


Agreed.


I will add that it was the Holy Spirit who inspired the Bible. Therefore if someone were to say, "The message doesn't matter, the Holy Spirit does the saving" (I'm not sure this is you), they are forgetting it was the Holy Spirit who told us how salvation occurs: through the Gospel.



Are you saying that Paul got saved then? I believe he was saved on the road when Jesus appeared to him. Jesus led him to Jesus!


Since Paul was persecuting people for the sake of the Gospel, I'm pretty sure he completely understood it by the time Christ confronted him.


I too find it interesting.

I believe Paul in reality was saved before he left Jerusalem yet in unbelief.

And I believe God the Father, through Jesus the Son of God called Paul and through the power of the Spirit of Truth, translated Paul out of unbelief unto belief.

But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. Gal 1:15-17

How long was Paul in Arabia and what did he learn while there?

Gal 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

 

[John of Japan]

No, you are arguing from silence without any evidence from Scripture that proves that Acts 17 is a comprehensive record of all that Paul said in that evangelistic encounter. You, therefore, do not have any evidence to prove what Paul did not testify to in Athens.

I do not need any additional evidence. The four Gospels all state all 4 truths explicitly. 1 Cor. 15 and Acts 13 together prove that Paul testified to all 4 truths when he preached the gospel.

Again, Christ commissioned them to be witnesses of His resurrection (Luke 24:48; Acts 1:8, 22). They did so by telling people that they saw, heard, touched, ate and drank with the risen Christ, etc. (Matt. 28; Mark 16; Luke 24; John 20-21; Acts 2:32; 3:15; 5:32; 10:39-41; 13:31; 22:6-10; 26:12-18; 1 Cor. 15:3-8).

Okay. Thanks for participating in the thread. Sorry you did not see fit to interact with what I actually wrote in Post #63, but decided instead to lecture me.

 

[John of Japan]

"that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;"

Good point.

 

[John of Japan]

I believe Paul in reality was saved before he left Jerusalem yet in unbelief.

This is confusing. So do you believe a person is saved without believing?

And I believe God the Father, through Jesus the Son of God called Paul and through the power of the Spirit of Truth, translated Paul out of unbelief unto belief.
.
But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. Gal 1:15-17

Indubitably.

How long was Paul in Arabia and what did he learn while there?

Gal 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

Most scholars believe he was there three years, and the Gospel was revealed to him along with other theology.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Wouldn't you call the substitutionary atonement a bare minimum??

I am quite certain that unless Christ has paid the price in full for someone's sins, he cannot be saved, since God could not then be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.
Whether one has to believe that in order to be saved is a different question, and one I leave to the Almighty.

 

[John of Japan]

I am quite certain that unless Christ has paid the price in full for someone's sins, he cannot be saved, since God could not then be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.
Whether one has to believe that in order to be saved is a different question, and one I leave to the Almighty.

Well, from my perspective, if people do not have to believe that Christ died for their sins, my 33 years as a missionary to Japan were wasted. I went there to proclaim Christ, and did so for all of those years. But hey, if I didn't have to I could have stayed back in the homeland, made money, enjoyed life....

But the Bible says, "How shall they hear without a preacher." And without a doubt, what the preacher must preach is that Christ died for the sins of the listeners and rose again.

 

[John of Japan]

No, you are arguing from silence without any evidence from Scripture that proves that Acts 17 is a comprehensive record of all that Paul said in that evangelistic encounter. You, therefore, do not have any evidence to prove what Paul did not testify to in Athens.

I do not need any additional evidence. The four Gospels all state all 4 truths explicitly. 1 Cor. 15 and Acts 13 together prove that Paul testified to all 4 truths when he preached the gospel.

Again, Christ commissioned them to be witnesses of His resurrection (Luke 24:48; Acts 1:8, 22). They did so by telling people that they saw, heard, touched, ate and drank with the risen Christ, etc. (Matt. 28; Mark 16; Luke 24; John 20-21; Acts 2:32; 3:15; 5:32; 10:39-41; 13:31; 22:6-10; 26:12-18; 1 Cor. 15:3-8).

So let me ask this in keeping with the OP. I was a missionary to Japan for 33 years. In accordance with what I believe the Gospel is, I witnessed to 100s of Japanese over the years, perhaps 1000s, and saw many folks profess Christ. According to your view, if I did not preach the burial of Christ, were they actually saved? Must one know about the burial of Christ to be saved?

Here's the thing about the burial and witnesses. They are not truths, they are facts. It would be very strange to say, "He died but he was not buried." Again, a resurrection requires witnesses. If no one sees the resurrected person, it cannot be proven that he resurrected. I once heard of a supposed Charismatic event where some dude raised 10 people from the dead. You will search the Internet in vain for witnesses to that event!

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Well, from my perspective, if people do not have to believe that Christ died for their sins, my 33 years as a missionary to Japan were wasted. I went there to proclaim Christ, and did so for all of those years. But hey, if I didn't have to I could have stayed back in the homeland, made money, enjoyed life....

But the Bible says, "How shall they hear without a preacher." And without a doubt, what the preacher must preach is that Christ died for the sins of the listeners and rose again.

John,
You asked

Wouldn't you call the substitutionary atonement a bare minimum??

I personally call substitutional atonement a bare minimum, but you will know that various people on this board believe that Christ died in some sense 'for' their sins without believing in Penal Substitution. You may believe that those people are all going to hell, but I prefer to leave that judgment to God.

 

[John of Japan]

John,
You will know that various people on this board believe that Christ died in some sense 'for' their sins without believing in Penal Substitution. You may believe that those people are all going to hell, but I prefer to leave that judgment to God.

Yeah, I've seen those discussions and have avoided them. The Bible says, "Christ died for our sins...." For this thread I see no profit in getting into the whole Penal Substitution argument.

And I make no judgment about "all those people are going to hell." That is not what this thread is about. It is about the content of the Gospel; what to tell to a lost sinner that will save him.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Yeah, I've seen those discussions and have avoided them. The Bible says, "Christ died for our sins...." For this thread I see no profit in getting into the whole Penal Substitution argument.

And I make no judgment about "all those people are going to hell." That is not what this thread is about. It is about the content of the Gospel; what to tell to a lost sinner that will save him.

Fair enough. I refer you to my various answers on this thread. Our content should be as full as we can make it, but God will decide what is the minimum one has to believe to be saved.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Here's the thing about the burial and witnesses. They are not truths, they are facts. It would be very strange to say, "He died but he was not buried." Again, a resurrection requires witnesses. If no one sees the resurrected person, it cannot be proven that he resurrected. I once heard of a supposed Charismatic event where some dude raised 10 people from the dead. You will search the Internet in vain for witnesses to that event!

No, it would not at all be strange for someone to think in his mind that Christ died but then experienced the vile, pagan abomination of cremation instead of being buried. That would especially be true in certain countries, especially the one where you ministered for many years.

Furthermore, nonsense about a "spiritual" resurrection is an entirely possible notion for someone to entertain.

More importantly than evaluating your experience in life is to handle the Bible correctly. Concerning when the apostle Paul preached the gospel to the Corinthians, the gospel by which they were saved, does the Scripture teach that he proclaimed to them the burial of Christ and His appearances or not?

 

[percho]

This is confusing. So do you believe a person is saved without believing?
Indubitably.


Most scholars believe he was there three years, and the Gospel was revealed to him along with other theology.

Let me ask.

Is it one's belief, that saves one?

Or; Is one saved by the blood [death] and resurrection [life again] of Jesus Christ and then called by God unto belief?

but ye do not believe, for ye are not of my sheep, John 10:26
All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way; -----LOST ----- Need to be saved.
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 1 Cor 15;1-4

John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice [called], and I know them [give them the Holy Spirit], and they follow me [Believe on me]:

Romans 5:9,10 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

I just had a thought, Let me know what you think about my thought.

You are in Japan preaching the gospel. Some believe and others do not believe. Now I ask are those hearing the gospel choosing of themselves to believe or is the following taking place?

YLT - Simeon did declare how at first God did look after to take out of the nations a people for His name,
NIV - Simon[fn] has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles.

Why do some become, of belief?

 

[John of Japan]

Fair enough. I refer you to my various answers on this thread. Our content should be as full as we can make it, but God will decide what is the minimum one has to believe to be saved.

I believe God already did that in the Bible. If He did not, that would be a huge divine oversight!

I was a missionary for 33 years, and you don't think God told me in His Word how to be a missionary???

 

[John of Japan]

Let me ask.

Is it one's belief, that saves one?

Or; Is one saved by the blood [death] and resurrection [life again] of Jesus Christ and then called by God unto belief?

This is a false dichotomy. It's not "either or." We believe, God saves.

but ye do not believe, for ye are not of my sheep, John 10:26
All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way; -----LOST ----- Need to be saved.
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 1 Cor 15;1-4

John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice [called], and I know them [give them the Holy Spirit], and they follow me [Believe on me]:

Romans 5:9,10 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Great Scriptures. I love the Word.

I just had a thought, Let me know what you think about my thought.

You are in Japan preaching the gospel. Some believe and others do not believe. Now I ask are those hearing the gospel choosing of themselves to believe or is the following taking place?

YLT - Simeon did declare how at first God did look after to take out of the nations a people for His name,
NIV - Simon[fn] has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles.

Why do some become, of belief?

This looks like you are trying to turn my thread into a Cal. vs. Arm. thread. Please don't do that. The thread is about the content of the Gospel message, which should be the same for both sides as long as they are thinking Scripturally.