"False Prophets" - Continuing the discussion

Mike has had a couple of very thought-provoking entries in his blog lately. Because they relate to religion, he's interested in my thoughts. So, with as much humility as I can manage, I'll respond to the post he made called "False Prophets."

The specific question Mike asks is "Is it possible to gain salvation from a tainted source?"

So, let me get pedantic, and then let me answer the question the way he really meant it.

Pedantic: From a Christian point of view, there is only one source of salvation, so it's clearly not possible to actually gain salvation from a tainted source.

But that's not what Mike meant, I think. What he means is a combination of two questions:

• Question 1: If "X" is a follower of another -- non-Christian -- religion, can "X" be saved?
• Question 2: If "Y" believes that a tainted human represents Christ's teachings, and "Y" dies believing that "Y" is following Christ by following the tainted human, can "Y" be saved?

Considering Question 1

Many people would like to believe that the answer to Question 1 is "yes." After all, as Mike says, God is a loving God. It seems like something a loving God would do.

The issue for evangelicals, and for others who believe that we find God's plan in the Bible not in our human interpretations of what "should" be, is that it's hard to support answering "Yes" to salvation for non-Christians based on the words of Christ.

Many people recognize the famous John 3:16:

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

This is the inclusive part of the message. It states that believers are saved. It does not state that non-believers are not saved. But just two verses later John 3:18 says

" Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

And later in that same chapter, in John 3:36, John writes that John the Baptist says

" Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."

From these passages, it's hard to understand how God could give us this message, and yet grant salvation to the unbelieving -- especially to those who actively believe something else -- those who have heard the good news, but "reject the Son."

I must get a little pedantic again. Sorry. In this case, I think it's important. You see, in context, Jesus is answering Nicodemus, a Pharisee who came to be a believer. Further, in some translations, Jesus stops speaking after these words in John 3:14-15:

"Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life."

Why is this important? Two reasons. First of all, if one specifically looks for what Christ says, it may be stated that some scholars believe the exposition in John 3:16-21 is from John, not directly from Jesus. For me, even if it's true, John lived among Jesus and learned from him. I believe he represented Jesus's teachings with the 3:16-21. But if some do not, I can see where they might say "It wasn't Jesus who said unbelievers are condemned, so we can't claim we know it's true." I can't follow the logic behind that, when it is applied to the rest of the gospels, or even the rest of John. But it's a possible "out."

The second reason to mention it is the context. Jesus was speaking to a Jew, and not just a Jew, a Pharisee, a teacher of God's word. Nicodemus knew the prophecies. He taught about a promised messiah. If he did not recognize and believe in the true Messiah, then clearly he was "rejecting the Son."

If there is a "loophole" that allows some non-believers salvation (as if God were some shifty lawyer, or could be fooled by one....) then it lies in the implied context. Nicodemus had heard all he needed to hear and knew all he needed to know. If he chose not to accept God's gift of grace, he would separate himself from the gift. But if someone has not heard, and does not know, then are they really "rejecting the Son?"

Now, let's get to the heart of it. I am not God. I do not decide who gets eternal life, and who gets something else.

I don't understand what Jesus could mean by his words in John 3:14-15 other than that life comes from following him (as life came from looking at the uplifted snake), while death -- or whatever the alternative is to everlasting life -- comes from not following him.

The question is "who is saved?" The only way I know to answer that question is to ask God. To hear his answer, I have prayer, and I have what He has said. This entry is based on both.

This is what I believe. And yet, I am imperfect, and my knowledge is limited. So I leave the final answer to God.


-------------------------

^[1] Even this is simplified. The Nicene Creed is typically held as the definition for what it means to "believe in Him." Merely believing he exists or existed is not logically enough -- the demons Jesus drove out of people believed in his existence and recognized who he was. That is not enough to save them.

My on-line source for the New International Version (NIV) and its notes is BibleGateway. It's very helpful for searching for verses with specific phrases -- as long as you are familiar with the way NIV is written. There are no "begats" in NIV, so if you're used to the King James Version, you might have a hard time.