I began these three posts on the gospel by saying that “You don’t have to believe the entire gospel to receive eternal life.”
Hopefully after reading the previous two posts (Gospel 1 and Gospel 2), you can see why my statement is true.
If the gospel is Jesus Christ and all truth is related to Him, then it is impossible to believe the entire gospel. The most we can do is believe certain truths of the gospel. When we say we “believe the gospel” or “believe in Jesus” this is a shorthand way of saying that we believe certain truths of the gospel. Since each person is at a different place in their theological development and their walk with God, it is likely that each person believes a different set of gospel truths.
In fact, it is quite likely that there are billions of people on earth today who believe certain truths of the gospel, and yet have not received eternal life.
Why not?
Because they haven’t yet believed the part of the gospel which pertains to eternal life, namely, that eternal life is given to those who believe in Jesus for it (John 3:16; 5:24; 6:47).
One gospel truth is that we are sinners. And most people believe this truth. But nowhere does Scripture say that believing we are sinners results in receiving eternal life.
So also with the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. Countless millions of people believe that about 2000 years ago, there was a man named Jesus who lived in Israel, preached sermons, performed miracles, was crucified on a cross, was buried, and rose again three days later from the dead. But — are you ready for this? — although these truths are extremely central to the gospel, nowhere does Scripture say that those who believe these things have received eternal life.
Many of those who believe these wonderful truths about the gospel, have not yet believed in Jesus for eternal life, but are instead, believing in themselves, their good works, their “being a good person”, their religious activity in a particular church, or a whole variety of others human ideas about how to receive eternal life.
It is one of the greatest tragedies of church history that millions of people can believe hundreds and maybe even thousands of gospel truths, but not believe the one truth which is found at the very heart of the gospel, which is that God gives eternal life to anybody and everybody who simply and only believes in Jesus Christ for it.
Though one does not need to believe the entire gospel to receive eternal life (and nobody can believe all of it anyway), one of the central truths at the heart of the gospel which must be believed is the truth about God’s absolutely free offer of eternal life through Jesus Christ.
Eternal life is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone.
Want to learn more about the gospel? Take my new course, "The Gospel According to Scripture."
The entire course is free for those who join my online Discipleship group here on RedeemingGod.com. I can't wait to see you inside the course!
the bottom line!
Absuletly dead on. I believe that so many fail to believe on Jesus is due to our primary disposition. Mankind believes that we can’t rely on anyone but ourselves. That somehow we can do better than God. That in someway we can make ourselves acceptable. Just sounds like pride to me.
I’m going to be lazy, and not fully read the several preceding posts that relate to Calvinism, and faith, and the Gospel. Based on my quick scan of those posts, I think I’m generally in agreement with you Jeremy. It seems good, though, to toss a few thoughts into the pot on this post.
I appreciate the point that it’s not some accumulation of correct apprehensions of truth that gains one eternal life. How much is enough? And, how correct does it have to be?
But, I think the post is weak when it comes to the use of the word ‘belief’. While there is some necessity of some correct understanding, I think it’s pretty basic, as in “…he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.
I understand faith this way: We must see that God is, and then, like a child with a human father, we must trust Him. We need to ‘faith’ Him, believing (like we want our young children to believe about us, their parents) that He is capable and wise, and that He cares for us.
As a father, I’m not interested so much that my children know correct information about me – that’s not the basis of my relationship with them. I’m interested that they trust that I have their best interests at heart, and that I have the knowledge and ability to care for them. Then, when I ask them to do something, they will operate in faith and will obey.
It is possible for my children to not trust me – not really believe that I have more knowledge and wisdom, or not really believe that I have their best interest in heart – but to still obey me. This is not faith, and it’s not pleasing. That kind of obedience is based on power – the fact that I have more power than them. But, isn’t it a beautiful and pleasing thing when we see that our children know that we love them and trust our judgement and capability? I think so, and I think God thinks so.
Which gets to salvation, or eternal life. It’s not just avoidance of punishment. It’s relationship. That’s the same thing we experience in our parent-child interactions. The loving care of a parent and the trusting response of a child results in a beautiful relationship. Salvation, or eternal life, is what we have when we, as children, respond to our loving Father with confident trust.
What do you think about that take on faith and salvation?
The parent to child relationship is a metaphor for the God to human relationship, it highlights some truths such as trust, love, and learning through copying but not others. God gave most of us the ability to mature into adulthood, and that suggests that God wants to have a relationship with us as adults if that is what we are. What do you think are the limitations of the parent to child metaphor in connection to the God to human adult relationship? Or to put the question in other words, what differences are there between the God to adult relationship, and the parent to child relationship?
Good question. As a biblical metaphor, it is incomplete – it doesn’t tell us everything about man’s relationship with God. And, it’s imperfect. The main weakness is that parents are to their children oh so much less than God is to mankind.
I like my children to trust that I love them, but my love is imperfect. I like my children to believe that I am wise and strong, but I’m often foolish and weak.
I think that if we make ourselves as little children toward God, then He will be ‘the rewarder of them who dilligently seek Him’.
You don’t think God wants us to relate like adults towards HIm? As adults isn’t our way of relating different to that of little children?
What does it look like for an adult human to relate to the Creator of everything? I think that our most articulate, wise and mature, we can hardly do better than to look to God and say “I believe that you love me and want the best for me, and I believe that you know better than I do, and as you speak, I want to listen. When I don’t know what to do, I want to look to you for guidance. ”
In the parent-child vs God-human metaphor, I think we are comparatiely in the position of children for the duration of our lives, until finally we see face to face, and know as we are known.
So, yes, I think God wants us to mature through the course of our lives, and I think our interaction with Him will change in many ways in the process of maturation, but I think our fundamental child-likeness relative to His father-role will maintain.
Does that line of thought make sense? Maybe you can unpack what an adult-to-God interaction looks like versus a child-to-God interaction.
Danh, I understand what you’re saying and I agree, but I think there’s a part that needs to be added to it. I think God wants us to bring our maturity to our relationship with Him too. He wants us to use mature reasoning and deep contemplation to at least try to understand difficult things. And although He cares for us, He wants us to act with adult self-sufficiency and responsibility too. The trust of a small child has more naivety about it, the trust of an adult can be more reasoned; it might not be stronger, but it has a different kind of strength.
I find in my own relationship with God these different elements: sometimes trusting without understanding, sometimes failing to trust, but always I feel the need to bring understanding into the relationship, self-reflective understanding and a deeper understanding of God and why He interacts with the world the way He does. My thinking and God’s thinking are clearly not the same, and I constantly have to try to develop my thinking and understanding so that I can find harmony with God. It’s not easy work, I really have to try hard to understand and to grow, bit by bit. Sometimes this kind of mental, conceptual growing can be painful. I think we grow as adults in a way that’s more challenging than the way we grow as children, at least in a “normal healthy context,” I think that’s something we have to bring to our adult relationship with God, The relationship requires more understanding, is more reflective, and more demanding. It’s childish, yes, but it’s also adult.
I appreciate that unpacking! And, I am with you. In fact, as an adult, I get great joy in the process of digging and considering and challenging and learning and growing. The foundation for my growth over time remains my trust in the person and purpose of God, but bit by bit, through tears and through laughter, I grow.
To begin another rabbit trail (although we’re running out of space in this comment section), I want to note that our walk with God is not (and is not intended to be) ‘from knowledge to increasing knowledge, unto the same fulness of knowledge’, but ‘from glory to glorly, into the same image’. The point of the maturation is an increasing conformity to the character of God.
It is one of the greatest tragedies of church history that billions of people believe thousands of individual gospel truths, but virtually no one believes that “aion” does not mean “eternal” when used in the NT, specifically as regards “salvation” <— TWEET THAT!
God DOES give aionan life to anybody and everybody who simply and only believes in Jesus Christ for it. There is NO OTHER MEANS for receiving aionian life. But "aionian life" and "eternal salvation" are not the same thing.
The Scripture records God's promise of resurrection to all Mankind — we ALL receive "death-less-ness", or "eternal life", in the resurrection. SOME receive it earlier (the "first resurrection") — this is known in Scripture as receiving aionian life, some refer to it as living in the "Millennium". AFTER that blessed aion, everyone else receives immortality and righteous judgment, purifying them in God's refining fire of truth. Once so purged, ALL MANKIND shall have received the Holy Spirit and dwell with God and Christ endlessly.
Now THAT'S some GOOD NEWS!
The lake of fire will burn things up, not refine them. Believing everyone will be saved is a false belief. People must choose in this life to believe on Jesus Christ.
You want to be my friend? You must choose or else I will torture you eternally 😀 Hahahaha. right? No.
Would you like to have everlasting life? Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
Rom 10:
9) 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.
10) For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
John 3:
16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Rom 6:
23) For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
I do not know much about Myers’ ministry. Does he promote universal salvation?
The bible does not teach everlasting torment in hell. Everlasting death -yes but not torment.
Emelio: I agree.