What do you believe is required for Salvation?

[FundyPat]

Faith in this:

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. (Romans 10:9-13 KJV)

Anything other than this, is overcomplicating a very simple matter. It just requires faith. Now does it require repentance??? Of course! Of every sin? No. Just a change of one's course. But, that only happens, when Salvation is real.

But, it does not require one to "go become holy" first. You simply have to believe.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

My husband was going to be going to a company reunion last night but it was cancelled because one of the men had a heart attack on Sunday and was in a coma. No one wanted to celebrate while Jeff was fighting for his life. DH has continued to work with this man in his web hosting business (Jeff would cover for Bob when we went away - taking care of any issues that might crop up where we couldn't take care of it because of lack of internet access) so he's decent friends with him.

Hubby heard that his wife wanted no visitors but he really wanted to go to Jeff so he called Jeff's wife and she said "Please come." so he did. He was there last night alone - his family had gone out to get a bite to eat. Bob had an hour or so alone with Jeff who is unresponsive in a coma. They know he has brain activity but they are not sure of the outcome.

So Bob went into the room and started speaking to Jeff. He prayed with him, read Scriptures to him then gave him the Gospel. He sat on the bed and told Jeff "I really would love for you to know Jesus as your Savior. Do you want this Jeff?" and Jeff opened his eye and looked right at Bob. No other response. Bob continued to present the Gospel and told him that there was nothing any of us could do to earn the grace of God and all we needed was to believe on Jesus Christ and put our faith in His death and resurrection for our salvation. Jeff opened his other eye and continued to look at Bob. My husband prayed with him and told him that he would continue to pray for him. Jeff closed his eyes.

Jeff has nothing more to do than to trust in Jesus Christ as his Savior. There is nothing more for ANY of us to do than that. God calls us, we respond. What comes after that is a result of the new life. A child breathes, eats, grows, learns, progresses and matures BECAUSE of his new life, not to earn his life.

So your saying Ann that this man is not a professing Christian?

 

[Zenas]

So Bob went into the room and started speaking to Jeff. He prayed with him, read Scriptures to him then gave him the Gospel. He sat on the bed and told Jeff "I really would love for you to know Jesus as your Savior. Do you want this Jeff?" and Jeff opened his eye and looked right at Bob. No other response. Bob continued to present the Gospel and told him that there was nothing any of us could do to earn the grace of God and all we needed was to believe on Jesus Christ and put our faith in His death and resurrection for our salvation. Jeff opened his other eye and continued to look at Bob. My husband prayed with him and told him that he would continue to pray for him. Jeff closed his eyes.

That's a great witness your husband did. It warms my heart just to read about it. But I have to wonder why he didn't go ahead and baptize him, you know, just in case??? Anyway, that is what Jesus said to do in the Great Commission.

 

[Dr. Walter]

So by your statement which seems uncommonly fair. Many of the people called heretics are not necissarily so but are actually saved individuals and have equal access to heaven as any other saved person? Why Call them Heretics?

Heretic has to do with one's theological views or pratices that are contrary to scripture and not necessarily reflective of their actual spiritual condition. I or you may be heretical on any given teaching of scripture. However, if their theological views are heretical in regard to essentials versus relatively none essentials, and especially in regard to those things the Scriptures themselves delcare to be essential and regard those who oppose them as heretical, such as Galatians 1:8-9 then they fit the condemnation that scripture defines them as (e.g. "accursed" Gal. 1:8-9) and thus we are to regard them such in agreement with the Biblical assessment.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Faith in this:



Anything other than this, is overcomplicating a very simple matter. It just requires faith. Now does it require repentance??? Of course! Of every sin? No. Just a change of one's course. But, that only happens, when Salvation is real.

But, it does not require one to "go become holy" first. You simply have to believe.

Why don't you quote Acts Chapter 2:37-38 When the question of Salvation comes up?

37Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Note the verse you used doesn't denote exclusivity now does it?

 

[annsni]

So your saying Ann that this man is not a professing Christian?

No, he was not. Where is he now? We may never know. He seemed to hear my husband - responded to his speaking. He had not done that with his wife. Can he be saved? Yes. Can he be a professing Christian after that? Not unless God brings him out of the coma. That does not look likely.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Heretic has to do with one's theological views or pratices that are contrary to scripture and not necessarily reflective of their actual spiritual condition. I or you may be heretical on any given teaching of scripture. However, if their theological views are heretical in regard to essentials versus relatively none essentials, and especially in regard to those things the Scriptures themselves delcare to be essential and regard those who oppose them as heretical, such as Galatians 1:8-9 then they fit the condemnation that scripture defines them as (e.g. "accursed" Gal. 1:8-9) and thus we are to regard them such in agreement with the Biblical assessment.

Again to what authority do you confer? Jesus Christ. Well, that's kind of vague since there is a plethera of opinion of what he seemed to be saying. Or as the scripture suggest the Holy Spirit? That's rather vague as well. The Bible? Well, there's a plethera of views on that as well. What right do you or I have to call anyone a heretic?
And the other question still remains. how wide is the narrow road?

 

[annsni]

That's a great witness your husband did. It warms my heart just to read about it. But I have to wonder why he didn't go ahead and baptize him, you know, just in case??? Anyway, that is what Jesus said to do in the Great Commission.

Because he would not baptize someone who couldn't give their testimony (how do we know he's saved??) and who has shown no evidence of being saved. Being baptized does not save. If this man was able to believe on Jesus Christ as his Savior, he's saved. End of story.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

TS.... and Ive almost forgiven you for being a Government Employee Yank but I am surprised that you do not understand Jesus Saves. Obviously your theological studies never taught you this....this is disheartening.

Are you aware of all the things did for you on the cross? Perhaps you should make a list of all that Christ accomplished on the cross for you & back it up with scripture before we proceed any further.

:tongue3:
I'm glad you've almost forgiven me. At least you're well on your way! Jesus Saves! Is such a vague term.
Ok Jesus saves the world thus the whole world is saved and he just have to keep ourselves in the boat right? Isn't that a universalistic Idea? Kind of like the liberal quakers?
Just curious.
Also I wonder is Matt being english is a barrister? Does he get to wear those goofy wigs? Note Lawyers have a lot more to be forgiven for. Notice how Jesus discusses them?

 

[chadman]

...then they fit the condemnation that scripture defines them as (e.g. "accursed" Gal. 1:8-9) and thus we are to regard them such in agreement with the Biblical assessment.

This begs the question: Scripturally speaking, what does ACCURSED really mean in real terms? Can a saved person be 'accursed'? What do you think this means?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Oh TS.... Wally is forever calling someone a heretic, an apostate or something or another. you gotta get over that & there will be a judgment day fortunately. :thumbs:

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Oh TS.... Wally is forever calling someone a heretic, an apostate or something or another. you gotta get over that & there will be a judgment day fortunately. :thumbs:

Yes. But Chadman brings up a good question.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Again to what authority do you confer? Jesus Christ. Well, that's kind of vague since there is a plethera of opinion of what he seemed to be saying. Or as the scripture suggest the Holy Spirit? That's rather vague as well. The Bible? Well, there's a plethera of views on that as well. What right do you or I have to call anyone a heretic?
And the other question still remains. how wide is the narrow road?

You seem to miss my final point. Galatians 1:8-9 explicitly states that those who preach another gospel than what Paul preached are to be regarded as "accursed." He repeats it for emphasis. If you openly proclaim a different gospel you fit that Biblical classification.

There is sufficient, over sufficient scriptures to precisely determine that Paul is speaking about the essential distinction between justificaiton by works versus by faith and Romans 3:24-5:2 precisely defines what he means by justification by faith without works in contrast to justification by works.

There is no "plethora of views" presented in the scripturs but the same simple consistent contrast made throughout the scriptures:

1. narrow versus broad, many versus few - Mt. 7:13-14
2. grace versus works - Eph. 2:8-9; Rom. 11:6
3. works versus faith - Rom. 3:24-5:2; Gal. 1:6-4:28
4. Same gospel before and after cross - Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12; 10:43;26:22-23; Heb. 4:2; etc.

Only in the mind of heretics and those confused by heretics are there a plethora of options. The scriptures are plentifully clear and painstakenly precise on this point.

 

[Matt Black]

Matt I expected less vagueness from you. You are a laywer and I've forgiven you for that occupation however your not writing legislation you're commenting on salvation. So Jesus saves is cool but what does that mean and what does it entail?

No I don't wear wigs, FTR, although I perhaps should as I am now follicly challenged.

I think the critical Person in salvation is Jesus. Not you, not me, not even particularly what we believe or do - up to a point of course*. The soteriological starting point has to be Jesus, the Man-Who-Is-God: His life, death, resurrection, ascension and future return in glory.

* As a bare minimum, it is vital (a) how we regard Him (was He fully human and fully Divine, Son of God and God the Son, did He die on the cross so that our sins may be forgiven), and how we respond to Him and His love for us.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

No, he was not. Where is he now? We may never know. He seemed to hear my husband - responded to his speaking. He had not done that with his wife. Can he be saved? Yes. Can he be a professing Christian after that? Not unless God brings him out of the coma. That does not look likely.

We aren't God Ann....only He knows at this stage. Again I always console myself with Genesis 18:25 Shall not the Judge of the earth do right.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

No I don't wear wigs, FTR, although I perhaps should as I am now follicly challenged.

I think the critical Person in salvation is Jesus. Not you, not me, not even particularly what we believe or do - up to a point of course*. The soteriological starting point has to be Jesus, the Man-Who-Is-God: His life, death, resurrection, ascension and future return in glory.

* As a bare minimum, it is vital (a) how we regard Him (was He fully human and fully Divine, Son of God and God the Son, did He die on the cross so that our sins may be forgiven), and how we respond to Him and His love for us.

So how narrow or how wide is the road. I've met drug addicts who believe in each point presented. We notice Hard Core Rappers when given an award for ingenious lyrics like "kill the police" point to the sky giving Jesus all the credit. If we were to calculate all the people on the planet claiming to believe these vital points I find the Narrow path isn't so narrow.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Yes. But Chadman brings up a good question.

You have a choice! You can side with the judgment of Scriptures or you can oppose the judgment of scriptures. Galatians 1:8-9 repeatedly states that anyone from heaven or earth that preaches "another gospel" than what Paul preached is to be regarded as "accursed." He wrote this to Christians in Galatia and he said about the same thing to the church at Corinthian (2 Cor. 11:4).

The only confusion that exists concerning the gospel Paul preached is in the minds of the "accursed" and those they have confused. Paul painstakenly makes it abundantly clear he is talking about the distinction between justification by faith versus justification by works throughout the book of Galatians. He defines with precision what he means by justification by faith without works in Romans 3:24-5:2.

The only confusion about what he means is in the mind of the "accursed" and those confused by them - simple and to the point. Inspired scriptures make the call and define who fits within that "accursed" or heretical position - not me. I simply choose to stand with the Biblical assessment according to the Biblical definition which is explicit, clear, uncomplicated, unambiguous and simply stated over and over and over again in the Scriptures.

If you balk at such clarity it is because either you are confused by the accursed or you are the accursed.

 

[annsni]

We aren't God Ann....only He knows at this stage. Again I always console myself with Genesis 18:25 Shall not the Judge of the earth do right.

Which is why he didn't baptize him. First off, he cannot immerse a man in a coma. Secondly, the man has not said that he is saved. Do we know he believed? Why not then just go baptizing people willy nilly?

Baptism is not necessary to get into heaven so it's not something we worry about on a death bed.

 

[Zenas]

Because he would not baptize someone who couldn't give their testimony (how do we know he's saved??) and who has shown no evidence of being saved. Being baptized does not save. If this man was able to believe on Jesus Christ as his Savior, he's saved. End of story.

Yes, but we have those pesky passages that include baptism in the plan of salvation. See, e.g., Post 25 above.

I once had this discussion with my pastor, who doesn't believe in baptismal regeneration. He said that if an unbaptized person made a profession of faith to him and appeared to be dying (could not be taken to a traditional baptistry), that he would baptize him by sprinkling.

And if there really is something to the idea of baptismal regeneration, it might save the man from the fires of Hell. What is the down side here?

 

[Dr. Walter]

Yes, but we have those pesky passages that include baptism in the plan of salvation. See, e.g., Post 25 above.

I once had this discussion with my pastor, who doesn't believe in baptismal regeneration. He said that if an unbaptized person made a profession of faith to him and appeared to be dying (could not be taken to a traditional baptistry), that he would baptize him by sprinkling.

And if there really is something to the idea of baptismal regeneration, it might save the man from the fires of Hell. What is the down side here?

The reason that many believe in baptismal regeneration is very simple. They do not consider the whole context of scriptures in regard to redemption and ceremonial redemptive ordinances. Baptism and the Lord's Supper are simply divine ordinances under the New Covenant in contrast to divine ordinances under the Old Covenant but both are ceremonial in nature and as such identify ceremonially ("sign" "seal" - Rom. 4:12) with redemption as they were designed to. Hebrews 10:1-4 plainly tells you this identification with the language of redemption is not to be understood literally but rather such ordinances are a "shadow" and not the reality of redemption and NEVER literally removed sins (v. 4). No ceremonial ordinances prior to the cross literally took aways sins and no ceremonial ordinances after the cross literally takes away sins but both before the cross and after the cross ceremonial ordinances accompany the langauge of redemption ("for sin" "for remission of sins" etc.).

Paul makes it very very clear in Romans 4:6-12 that justification (remission of sins and imputation of righteousness - vv. 6-8) occur by faith BEFORE submission to such divine ordinances - v. 12. However, baptismal regenerationists interpret baptism exactly as the Jews interpreted circumcision (Acts 15:3) linking LITERAL salvation and remission of sins inseparably from the ordinance.

Baptism saves, and remits sins but the question is how? Literally or figuratively. Peter makes it clear it is a like "FIGURE" - 1 Pet. 3:21. Paul makes it clear it is not literally but a "sign" and "seal" of something already accomplished (Rom. 4:12). The Writer of Hebrews makes it clear it is a "SHADOW" not the reality.

The gospel is the SAME before and after Calvary (Heb. 4:2; Acts 10:43) in regard to remission of sins. If the pre-cross ceremonial ordinances did not literally remove sins (Heb. 10:4) and it remission of sins was by faith (Acts 10:43; Rom. 4:12) then the post-cross gospel remits sins literaly by faith and figuratively by ceremonial ordinances as well or else it is not the same gospel (Heb. 4:2; Acts 10:43; 26:22-23 - "none other things")