@Richard_Wright1 and @mitchellmckain I appreciate your posts above, with @Mervin_Bitikofer and @Laura, @beaglelady. I wonder if we’re dealing with a different definition here. I’d appreciate @ManiacalVesalius’ opinion.
I would agree that accepting the right things helps us in our relationship to God. However, I rebel inwardly to think that the actual knowledge of something is what saves us. It doesn’t seem fair. After all, I don’t think that God judges my 5 year old daughter based on her incomplete knowledge of salvation; though she does sin, I don’t think that God will throw her into hell for either the sin or the lack of knowledge. I also don’t think that God will judge those based on acceptance of something they have never heard of (those who have not heard), or can 't understand (mentally challenged)–but on their repentance. Mr McKain wrote of a God who judges based on truthfulness–maybe he’s had some PTSD with regard to preaching an unkind God (I think, based on my response to some sermons, I’ve had the same).
Matthew Bates wrote a book called “Salvation by Allegiance Alone,” approved by Scot McKnight and Michael Bird, two of my favorite writers with great credentials, which argues that “faith” is the word “pistis,” more at accepting God’s/ Christ’s lordship rather than believing in a creed.
Apparently, that’s the main term used for faith and belief in the NT (the book is much more in depth, and I’ve unfortunately only skimmed it after I bought it; but there are reviews Matthew Bates - Salvation By Allegiance Alone (Baker Academic, 2017) | OnScript
In this view, faith is not
- The opposite of evidence assessment
- A leap in the dark
- The opposite of works
- An “It’s all good” attitude
- Reducible to intellectual assent (pp15-25)
He argues:
- The true climax of the gospel–Jesus’ enthronement–has generally been deemphasized or omitted from the gospel
- Consequently, “pistis” been misaimed and inappropriately nuanced with respect to the gospel. It is regarded as “trust” in Jesus’ righteousness alone or “faith” that Jesus’ death covers my sins rather than “allegiance” to Jesus as king.
- Final salvation is not about attainment of heaven but about embodied participation in the new creation. when the true goal of salvation is recognized, terms such as “faith,” “works,” “righteousness,” and “the gospel” can be more accurately reframed.
- Once it is agreed that salvation is by allegiance alone, matters that have traditionally divided Catholics and Protestants–the essence of the gospel, faith alone versus works, declared righteousness versus infused righteousness–are reconfigured in ways that may prove helpful for reconciliation. (p9)
James writes in 1:27 “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.”
Micah 6:8 He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.
Psalm 51:16, 1716 You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it;
you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings.
17 My sacrifice, O God, is[b] a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart
you, God, will not despise.
But I certainly want to teach my daughter more, as she grows, about the God who sent his Son to die for us and identify with us. And our relationship to God grows as we learn more about him day to day, and repent and with His help, as with Eustace, accept HIs purification. George Macdonald observed in one of his books that with time and learning more of God, we realize there are things that we are ashamed of in ourselves, even though a few days ago we weren’t aware of them.
I’m not being dogmatic or unrestricted about this. I’d appreciate your thoughts.
Thanks.