Into the Wardrobe

::Are you discounting John III.16 or Romans X.9-11?

What is the context of John 3:16? Jesus is instructing Nicodemus as to how one enters the kingdom of God. To believe in him is to receive his testimony, to trust his instruction and obey. He has ascended into heaven, and testifies to what he has seen; therefore his testimony is to be believed, that is, trusted, and his instructions carried out.

What is the context of Romans 10:9-11? Just look at the passage that Paul cites (for ancient speakers, unlike modern writers, do not cite prooftexts, but call to mind entire stories or accounts, to establish an extended parallel which authorizes their own teaching as a reiteration): Deuteronomy 30:11-14 Surely this commandment that I am commanding you today is not too hard for you, nor is it too far away. It is not in heaven, that you should say "who will go up to heaven for us, and get it for us so that we may hear it and observe it?" Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say "Who will cross to other side of the sea for us, and get it for us so that we may hear it and observe it? No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart for you to observe." Paul compares the Babylonian's search for wisdom with the Jewish search for righteousness apart from Christ, a vain and arrogant exercise because Christ is the hand held out to a disobedient and contrary people.

::Wasn't His temptation real? Look at the first few verses of Mt. IV and Luke IV; even more to the point, Hebrews IV.15

What was the Christ tempted to do, if not abandon the sacrifice which would recreate the world in order to instead rule the degenerated world? In fact, the very temptation was to show concern for himself rather than obey the will of God by concerning himself with others.

::Do they accept Christ as the only propitiation for damnable sin? Yes.
Are they baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit? Yes. As a layman I'm not aware of any further requirements to fulfill the hope of salvation. Admittedly they have "extra scriptures" which I consider apocryphal. They believe the Trinity are three whereas I believe the Trinity are one. Be that as it may, if doctrinal error precludes salvation, then we have to be perfect before we approach the throne of grace, and that seems unscriptural to me.

Mental consent to doctrine is meaningless. Confession, in the context of the New Testament, was a work, particularly for the Johannine community when confession would have you exiled or executed.

Society is ridiculous for judging a man's belief according to what he thinks without consequence or says without cost; if I tell myself or tell others that I trust my friend, but entrust him with nothing, then what do I truly believe in my heart? What then does it mean to trust Christ, if we do not entrust him with our lives?

Nothing.

I don't think it can boil down to just a question of teaching on morality. I think it's a more fundamental understanding of who God is. God's teaching on morality reveals His character. Even for Cain and Saul, I don't think we're talking purely about actions, but rather actions as a result of a lack of understanding who God is. Both Cain and Saul seemed to think their worship would be accepted and this showed a lack of understanding of who God is. Of course, we can only expect understanding to the level that God has revealed Himself. Probably Cain should have known better. Certainly Saul should have.

- Dan -