For if You Believe That Jesus Died and Rose Again You Will Be Saved

Since it's Easter week, I want to resurrect a discussion I participated in over at Evangelical Village a week or and then ago (unfortunately, the site and the original discussion are no longer available.)  It began when my friend Matt posed a elementary but important question:

"What must a person know in lodge to exist saved?  What theological knowledge must a person know in guild to go a believer?"

Allow me say up front that I don't want anyone to think I'm beingness critical of Matt here.  I love my brother, I recommend his blog, and I know that he was doing what he always does very well–request thought-provoking questions, and involving others in the give-and-take.  I appreciate that.

The thrust of the post was that information technology probably isn't necessary to "know" much to be saved, simply you lot do have to "believe."  I commenter gave the case of the thief on the cantankerous.  He knew very little, simply he believed in Jesus and was saved.

In the original postal service Matt had asked:

"If one would take the stance that a person must have a knowledge of personal sin and the cede of Jesus, then would you say that God cannot relieve a person by merely reading John three:xvi? … We need to dissever the ideal from the necessary."

God can do whatever He wants, just essentially I felt that this arroyo to faith set upwards a imitation dichotomy between what we know and what we believe.  I think that what we believe (or who we trust) is necessarily congenital on a foundation of what nosotros know.

I pointed out that Paul said we must believe in our heart that God raised Christ from the expressionless (which assumes we would have to first know that he was in fact raised) in gild to be saved (Romans 10:9-11).  That prompted Matt to ask:

"Then Barry, does one have to know the Resurrection to be saved? Or could God save someone just by reading John 3:16?"

I replied (with a few edits included here):

I call up that in Paul's mind (which is the mind of the Spirit) understanding the resurrection falls into the category of "the necessary" rather than "the ideal."  In improver to the passage I quoted earlier (Romans 10:9-xi), Paul considered the resurrection essential to the gospel:

"Now I would remind y'all, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you lot are being saved, if you concord fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

For I delivered to you lot equally of first importance what I as well received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures…" (1 Cor. 15:1-iv)

Not only was the resurrection essential to the gospel, the gospel was essential to salvation. That'due south evident in this passage from the tiny (merely massively important) discussion "if" in the phrase: "by which you are beingness saved, if you concord fast to the word I preached to you" (i.eastward., the expiry, burying, and resurrection of Jesus).

It's also evident in other passages. The gospel (again, the expiry, burying and resurrection of Jesus, according to 1 Cor. xv) is "the power of God for conservancy to everyone who believes" (Rom. 1:16)

Nosotros're saved by believing in Jesus, but what Jesus is that? One who was just a great moral instructor? One who was only a prophet? One who was willing to die for what he believed in? Or 1 who is defined past the content of the gospel?  I believe it's the latter.  Which gospel and which Jesus one believes in really, actually matters.  That's clear from the following passages:

"For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the i we proclaimed, or if you receive a dissimilar spirit from the one you lot received, or if yous have a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put upwards with it readily enough." (ii Cor. 11:4)

"But even if we or an affections from sky should preach to you a gospel opposite to the one nosotros preached to y'all, let him be accursed. As nosotros have said before, and so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel reverse to the one yous received, let him be accursed. (Gal. one:viii-ix)

I've continued to recollect most that word.  It's certainly possible that I'm wrong, just at this indicate, I stand by my conclusion.  Our belief in Christ is not properly focused, and therefore unable to save, without a clear understanding of Christ's death for our sins, and his resurrection on the third day.

So…what do you retrieve?  Is it necessary to believe in the resurrection of Jesus to exist saved?

…if yous confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you volition be saved. For with the eye one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, 'Everyone who believes in him volition not exist put to shame.' (Rom. ten:9-11)

And if Christ has not been raised, your organized religion is futile and y'all are yet in your sins (1 Corinthians xv:17)

mcbeeandonellove.blogspot.com

Source: https://barrywallace.wordpress.com/2009/04/08/is-it-necessary-to-believe-in-the-resurrection-of-jesus-to-be-saved/