Regarding the questions I posed from last week, starting with the first:
According to the NIV note on Romans 10:9, salvation involves inward belief (‘within your heart’) as well as outward confession (‘with your mouth’). The Merriam-Webster definition of the word confess includes more than simply speaking, but it means to make known, acknowledge, or give evidence of.
This is not to say that words are meaningless. The tongue has the power of life and death (Pr 18:21). The world was created by spoken word (Gen 1). But the kingdom of God is not a matter of mere talk, but of power (1 Co 4:20). For the believer, what begins with words is manifested in tangible, very real results (Jas 2:17-18, 26).
But Jesus and Isaiah even acknowledged the hypocrisy of non-believers who honor the Lord with their lips, but their hearts are far from him (Isa 29:13; Mt 15:7-8). This testifies to the fact that confession involves more than simply talking the talk and conforming to religious expectations of what a Christian looks and sounds like (Jesus also preaches against religious conformity for the sake of putting on airs too, in Mt 15:9.). But it’s what’s in the heart that matters most. The things we do -or don’t do- is evidence of what’s in our hearts (Mt 12:33).
Concerning the second question, the phrase ‘born of water’ refers to baptism in the context of John 3:5. However, in Luke 23:39-43, what we know of the criminal who Jesus said would be with him in paradise was based on his testimony. His rebuking of the other criminal (‘Don’t you fear God?’), his since of justice (‘We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve.’), and his recognition of Jesus as holy (‘But this man has done nothing wrong.’) all identify him as a believer. So, either he always belonged to God and got caught up in crime, or what we witnessed was his salvation right there on the cross. Either way, Jesus accepted him.
Notice what wasn’t said though: There was no repentance from the man, or mention of his baptism (Jn 3:5; Ac 2:38). The criminal did not allude to Jesus’ prophesized resurrection, nor did he recognize that Jesus is Christ, or God’s only son (Jn 3:16; 11:25; 1 Jn 5:1). I assume that this means one of two things: either Jesus accepted the man based on previous confessions (Remember, we only get a snapshot of his life at Calvary.), or Jesus accepted him based off of the confession of his heart. Jesus had responded to the questions of the heart before, as well as questions that were asked out loud, but may’ve been out of his earshot (Lk 5:22, 30-31). He perceives our thoughts from afar (Ps 139:2). Nothing in all creation is hidden form God’s sight. Everything is laid bare before the eyes of him whom we must give account (Heb 4:13).
God is more than faithful, and will always do his part (Nu 23:19; 1 Co 1:9). But as far as our part is concerned, I believe that every individual is responsible for what they know, or have had the opportunity to know before they are ultimately judged by God (2 Co 5:10). Works are evident of faith, but our relationship with works (e.g. baptism and confession) cannot not be substituted for a genuine relationship with God. It’s not works that save us, but it’s by grace that we’re saved through faith (Eph 2:8-9).
Lot of interesting stuff here Michael!
ReplyDeleteFocusing on your second point, you seem to be suggesting that perhaps the thief is an exception to Jesus' statement about being born of water and the spirit. I think that may be true, but I don't think it's as unique an example as maybe you're thinking. After all, the baptism we associate with the kingdom today (under the new covenant) is the baptism in which we participate with Jesus in his death and resurrection (Rom 6:4). At the point of the story you're referring to, Jesus had not yet died, much less resurrected, so no such baptism existed for the thief to participate in.
So to that extent, the thief was no different than the many other people who's sins Jesus forgave, many apparently without a confession of faith or baptism. Moreover, none of the old testament figures whom we expect to see at the resurrection participated in this sort of baptism either. So it comes as no surprise, then that people will enter God's kingdom sans baptism. But all those people we've talked about were living in a very different circumstance than us today (namely before the new covenant).
So the question then becomes what's 'normative' for us today? And, less importantly, are there any exceptions to what is normative today?